the determinants of strategy implementation in …
TRANSCRIPT
THE DETERMINANTS OF STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION IN
SERVICE FIRMS: A CASE OF UNITED NATIONS
HUMANITARIAN AIR SERVICES SOMALIA
BY
MICHAEL AHAMED
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY AFRICA
SUMMER 2015
THE DETERMINANTS OF STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION IN
SERVICE FIRMS: A CASE OF UNITED NATIONS
HUMANITARIAN AIR SERVICES SOMALIA
BY
MICHAEL AHAMED
A Research Project Report Submitted to Chandaria School of Business
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Masters in
Business Administration (MBA)
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY AFRICA
SUMMER 2015
iii
STUDENT’S DECLARATION
I, the undersigned, declare that this is my original work and has not been submitted to any
other college, institution or university other than the United States International University
in Nairobi for academic credit.
Signed: ________________________ Date: _________________________
Michael Ahamed (ID: 619113)
This research project proposal has been presented for examination with my approval as the
appointed supervisor.
Signed: ________________________ Date: _________________________
Dr. Paul Katuse
Signed: _______________________ Date: _________________________
Dean, Chandaria School of Business
iv
COPYRIGHT
All rights reserved; no part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording
or otherwise without the express written authorization from the writer.
Michael Ahamed © 2015
v
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to determine the determinants of strategy implementation in
service firms. The study was guided by the following research questions. Does Leadership
affect strategy implementation? How do organizational resources impact strategy
implementation? Is there a relationship between culture and strategy implementation? The
study adopted a descriptive research design. In this study the total population comprised
the 200 World Food Programme employees based in Nairobi and Somalia. A stratified
random sampling was used to draw 30% of the 200 employees which translates into 60
employees to form the sample size. Primary data was collected using a questionnaire. The
data analysis involved descriptive statistics [frequencies, percentages, means] while
inferential statistics involved correlations and regression analysis to infer the findings to
the entire population. The findings were presented in form of tables and figures.
The first research question sought to identify the effects of leadership on strategy
implementation. The study identified coming up with vision as the major role of leadership
in strategy implementation followed by employee motivation and effective communication.
The relationship between vision, motivation and communication displayed statistically
significant positive correlation with strategy implementation. Vision had a moderate
positive correlation with strategy implementation; motivation had a moderate positive
correlation with strategy implementation, while adaptability to change did not have
statistically significant relationship with strategy implementation. Further, the variables of
vision, motivation and communication significantly correlate with one another in the
model.
The second research question sought to identify the role of organizational resources in
strategy implementation. Human resources, financial resources, information systems and
organizational structure were subjected to regression analysis with strategy
implementation. The study showed that human resources, financial resources, information
systems and organizational structure displayed statistically significant positive correlation
with strategy implementation. Human resources had a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation; financial resources had a weak positive correlation with strategy
implementation; information system had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation, while organizational structure had a weak positive correlation with
strategy implementation. Human resources, financial resources, information systems and
vi
organizational structure significantly correlate with one another in the model. Regression
analysis showed that human resources contributed more to the success of strategy
implementation followed by effective information systems, financial resources and finally
effective organizational structure.
The third research question sought to identify the effects of organizational culture on
strategy implementation. The study showed that culture of stability, culture of risk taking
and culture of results oriented displayed statistically significant positive correlation with
strategy implementation. Stability culture had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation; risk taking culture had a weak positive correlation with strategy
implementation while results oriented culture displayed a moderate positive correlation
with strategy implementation. Further, the variables of stability, risk taking and result
oriented cultures significantly correlate with one another in the model. The study showed
that the culture of results oriented and stability contributed more to the success of strategy
implementation followed by the culture of risk taking.
The study recommends that the organization should put measures to ensure the potential of
being visionary, staff motivation and effective communication are fully exploited. Further,
it is imperative for the organization to establish a continuous human resource development
to be able to anticipate and deal with the emerging issues in strategy implementation. The
study also recommends that the organization needs to be more flexible in its management
approach to promote innovativeness to effectively respond to the emerging issues in
strategy implementation. Finally, studies in other related organizations would help develop
a stronger empirical evidence of the effects of leadership, organizational resources and
culture on strategy implementation.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I thank God for providing me with the wisdom and strength to put this
work together. Without Him none of this would have been possible.
Secondly I acknowledge my family for their encouragement and support during the time of
writing this thesis. I love you.
Third I remain grateful to Dr. Paul Katuse for his guidance and suggestions during this
research. His insights were valuable in making this work a success.
Last but not least my sincere appreciation goes to my colleagues and friends who
encouraged me in this journey.
viii
DEDICATION
This thesis is dedicated to my loving parents for instilling in us the quest of knowledge and
laying down the foundation of success.
To my siblings, the beauty of education is that it allows you to fill in the gaps at whatever
stage in your life. It is never late to go for it.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STUDENT’S DECLARATION ...........................................................................................iii
COPYRIGHT ......................................................................................................................... iv
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT................................................................................................... vii
DEDICATION .....................................................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. xi
LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................................................. xii
ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................xiii
CHAPTER ONE ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background of the Problem ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................. 4
1.3 Purpose of the Study .......................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 6
1.5 Importance of the Study ..................................................................................................... 6
1.6 Scope of the Study.............................................................................................................. 6
1.7 Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................ 7
1.8 Chapter summary ............................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER TWO .................................................................................................................... 8
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................... 8
2.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Leadership on Strategy Implementation ........................................................................... 8
2.3 Organization Resources on Strategy Implementation.................................................... 15
2.4 Organizational Culture on Strategy Implementation ..................................................... 21
2.5 Chapter Summary ............................................................................................................. 26
CHAPTER THREE ............................................................................................................. 27
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 27
3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 27
3.2 Research Design ............................................................................................................... 27
x
3.3 Population and Sampling Design .................................................................................... 27
3.4 Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 29
3.5 Research Procedures ........................................................................................................ 29
3.6 Data Analysis Methods .................................................................................................... 29
3.7 Chapter Summary ............................................................................................................. 30
CHAPTER FOUR ................................................................................................................ 31
4.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS ......................................................................................... 31
4.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 31
4.2 Demographics ................................................................................................................... 31
4.3 Leadership on Strategy Implementation ......................................................................... 33
4.4 Organizational Resources on Strategy Implementation................................................. 40
4.5 Culture on Strategy Implementation ............................................................................... 46
4.6 Chapter Summary ............................................................................................................. 51
CHAPTER FIVE .................................................................................................................. 52
5.0 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................... 52
5.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 52
5.2 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 52
5.3 Discussions ....................................................................................................................... 53
5.4 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 58
5.5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 60
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 62
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 73
Appendix A: Cover Letter...................................................................................................... 73
Appendix B: Questionnaire.................................................................................................... 74
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Population Distribution ......................................................................................... 27
Table 3.2 Sample Size ............................................................................................................ 28
Table 4.1: Highest Education Level ...................................................................................... 33
Table 4.2: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Strategy Implementation Items ....................... 34
Table 4.3: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Leadership Items .............................................. 35
Table 4.4: Vision Setting........................................................................................................ 36
Table 4.5: Motivation ............................................................................................................. 36
Table 4.6: Communication..................................................................................................... 37
Table 4.7: Adaptive Change .................................................................................................. 38
Table 4.8: Correlation Matrix for the Roles of Leadership ................................................ 39
Table 4.9: Coefficient of Determination (R2) for Leadership Roles ................................... 39
Table 4.10: Multiple Regression Analysis for Leadership Roles ........................................ 40
Table 4.11: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Organizational Resources Test Items ........... 41
Table 4.12: Human Resources ............................................................................................... 42
Table 4.13: Financial Resources ............................................................................................ 42
Table 4.14: Information Systems........................................................................................... 43
Table 4.15: Organizational Structure .................................................................................... 44
Table 4.16: Correlation Matrix for the Organizational Structure ....................................... 45
Table 4.17: Coefficient of Determination (R2) for Organizational Resources ................... 46
Table 4.18: Multiple Regression Analysis for Organizational Resources .......................... 46
Table 4.19: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Culture Test Items ......................................... 47
Table 4.20: Team Work ......................................................................................................... 48
Table 4.21: Culture of Stability ............................................................................................. 48
Table 4.22: Risk Taking Culture ........................................................................................... 49
Table 4.23: Results Oriented ................................................................................................. 49
Table 4.24: Correlation Matrix for the Effect of Culture .................................................... 50
Table 4.25: Coefficient of Determination (R2) for the Effects of Culture .......................... 50
Table 4.26: Multiple Regression Analysis for the Effects of Culture ................................. 51
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: CVF framework (Cameron and Quinn, 1999)................................................... 22
Figure 4.1: Response Rate ..................................................................................................... 31
Figure 4.2: Gender of the Respondents ................................................................................. 32
Figure 4.3: Management Level .............................................................................................. 32
Figure 4.4: Length of Service ................................................................................................ 33
xiii
ABBREVIATIONS
CVF : Competing Value Framework
FAO : Food and Agriculture Organization
NGO : Non-Governmental Organization
SPSS : Statistical Package for Social Sciences
UNHAS : United Nations Humanitarian Air Services
UNHCR : United Nations High Commission for Refugees
UNICEF : United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund
UNOCHA : United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs
UNWFP : United Nations World Food Programme
WFP : World Food Programme
1
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Problem
One of the main reasons for the emergence of strategic management in the last quarter of
the 20th century was to pay proper attention to strategy implementation in companies (Cater
& Pucko, 2010). The business environment has become turbulent forcing business
organizations to shift the way strategies are implemented to remain competitive. Strategic
management is the set of decisions and actions that result in the formulation and
implementation of plans designed to achieve a company’s objectives (Pearce & Robinson,
2007).
As a process, strategic management consists of formulation, implementation and
assessment steps. Strategy implementation is the process of attaining goals by using the
organization structure to execute the formulated strategy properly (Rugman, Collinson, &
Hodgetts, 2006). A good strategic decision alone cannot generate value for an organization
and its stakeholders if it is poorly implemented. This makes strategy implementation an
integral component of the strategic management process. Strategy implementation process
turns the formulated strategy into a series of actions and results to ensure that the vision,
mission, strategy and strategic objectives of the organization are successfully achieved as
planned (Thompson, Strickland, & Gamble, 2007).
Hunger and Wheelen (2010) stated that although implementation is usually considered after
strategy has been formulated, implementation is a key part of strategic management.
Strategy formulation and strategy implementation should thus be considered as two sides
of the same coin. Initially, a heavy volume of studies and research in the strategic
management field was focused on strategy formulation. In recent years however, an evident
shift of focus from strategy formulation to strategy implementation has happened (Kalali,
Akhavan & Pourezzat, 2011). The study by Kaplan and Norton (2001) on 275 portfolio
managers indicated that a company’s ability to implement strategy is far more important
than the strategy itself. This makes implementation to be very important in the formation
of a corporate management system.
2
According to Yabs (2007), strategy implementation requires the presence of certain
requirements. These include factors that emanate from the external environment and factors
coming from the internal environment. External environment factors include all inputs that
go into a firm converting them into finished products. These are raw materials, manpower,
energy, and fuel. Internal environment factors include facilities, machinery, internal
structures, human resources, financial strength and leadership.
It has been observed that many organizations find strategy formulation easier than strategy
implementation. According to Hrebiniak (2008), formulating a strategy is hard but it is
much harder to execute or implement it in an organization. Much more is known about
planning than doing, about strategy making than strategy work (Cater & Pucko, 2010).
Many organizations have the right strategies yet it is only a few of them that are able to
implement them successfully. This has compelled managers to understand the key
determinants of successful strategy implementation in their organization. The failure of
organizations in achieving business targets can be attributed to problems during the
implementation phase and not the strategy formulation process. This practical gap creates
a need to understand more deeply the factors affecting the successful strategy
implementation. This initiative helps organizations to overcome and prevent failure in
implementing strategic initiatives.
United Nations Humanitarian Air Services (UNHAS) Somalia is a division under the
United Nations Agency World Food Programme (UNWFP) Somalia operation that is
mandated with the provision of air transport services (World Food Programme [WFP],
2014). World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian agency fighting hunger
worldwide. It is involved in delivering food during emergencies to areas where it is needed
most, saving the lives of victims of war, civil conflict and natural disasters (WFP, 2014).
WFP Somalia was moved to Nairobi from Mogadishu in 1995 where it is exiled to date
(Jaspers & Maxwell, 2008). The operation has established eleven offices in various regions
in Somalia. The majority of the organization 200 plus staff are based in the field but the
operation is remotely managed, coordinated and supported from the Nairobi office also
called the Country Office. WFP Somalia facilitates the delivery of life-saving humanitarian
assistance and the movement of aid workers from Kenya to Somalia, by providing critical
and safe air services under the flagship of United Nations Humanitarian Air Services
3
(UNHAS). The core objective of UNHAS Somalia is to facilitate the delivery of life-saving
humanitarian assistance and movement of humanitarian workers in Somalia, through the
provision of critical and safe passenger air services at a subsidized cost, while ensuring
adequate levels of safety and security. UNHAS supports WFP Strategic objective of saving
lives and protecting livelihoods in emergencies (WFP, 2014).
Air operations have become an essential component of the humanitarian response strategy
because timely access to affected populations is a prerequisite to an effective response
(WFP 2014). The decision for UNHAS to begin operating in any given location is not taken
lightly. A thorough rapid evaluation is conducted to establish the humanitarian needs from
both a donor and recipient perspective. UNHAS will only consider launching an operation
where no safe surface transport or viable commercial aviation options are available. In most
countries requiring humanitarian assistance, surface travel is impeded by challenging
security situations, long distances and poor road conditions. Furthermore, most of the
destinations the humanitarian community needs to reach are not served by safe commercial
air operators (WFP, 2014). UNHAS provides non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
UN agencies, donor representatives, the diplomatic community and humanitarian
implementing partners with the access they need to reach remote or inaccessible
beneficiaries promptly. This enables them to implement and monitor life-saving projects
that include food security; water, sanitation and hygiene, protection, health and early
recovery (WFP, 2014).
Somalia is home to one of the world longest running crises and is one of the most difficult
humanitarian operating environments in the world. The country has been without a
functioning government for over 20 years which has resulted in a high level of insecurity
that has made the availability of humanitarian air services critical to the support of
humanitarian relief programs in the country. From late 2010 onwards, as humanitarian
actors responded to deteriorating food security conditions across the country, they were
confronted with an evolving food access crisis exacerbated by two successive droughts,
embedded within an increasing complex operational context of conflict, insecurity,
geopolitical uncertainty, humanitarian access constraints and compliance concerns
including donor anti-terrorism legislations (Haan, Devereux, & Maxwell, 2012).Travel
overland in Somalia is difficult due to impassable roads, damaged infrastructure and
security concerns. In addition the weather conditions make it tough for road transport
4
during day time. This leaves air transportation as the only reliable means of travel for
humanitarian personnel throughout the country to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian
assistance to the affected population. It is therefore imperative to establish a clear
understanding of the factors that affect strategy implementation for the organization to
successfully carry out its mandate and achieve its objectives. The study sought to establish
the determinants of strategy implementation.
1.2 Problem Statement
Many organizations continue to record high failure rates in the implementation of their
strategies. This is caused by the failure of paying attention to both the internal and external
environmental forces affecting the organization. According to Tampoe and Macmillan
(2000), the lack of success in strategy implementation in the business environment is an
area of major concern to strategist. While this field of research attracted significant research
interests and subsequently added quality theories and models in the western world and in
the profit organizations, this topic has not attracted much attention at UNHAS Somalia. A
study by Rajasekar (2014) investigated the strategy implementation processes followed in
a service industry in the Sultanate of Oman. The study proposed seven factors that affect
strategy implementation with leadership by far being the most important factor influencing
successful implementation strategy in the service sector.
Another study by Mbaka and Mugambi (2014) sought to review the factors that affect
strategy implementation in the Water Sector in Kenya. The study identified strategy
formulation process, relationship among different departments and different strategy levels,
executors, communication, implementing tactics, consensus, commitment, organization
structure, employees and inadequate resources as some of the factors that affect strategy
implementation.
Messah and Mucai (2011) carried out an analysis of factors influencing the implementation
of strategic management plans in selected tertiary institutions in Meru central District in
Kenya. The study showed that weak influence of managerial behavior was as a result of
strategic thinking of the management and the influence of rewards and incentives were
found to be weak as it was the intrinsic motivation of the teacher’s professional ethics than
extrinsic motivation by management through tangible reward by management that made
the lecturers cooperate in the implementation of strategic plans. Institutional policies were
5
also revealed to be weak in influencing strategy implementation because of low awareness
and the infrequent use of the service charter which is a critical ‘barometer’ of strategy
implementation effectiveness and efficiency.
Further, an online databases review by Li, Guohui and Eppler (2008) identified strategy
formulation and relationships among different units departments and different strategy
levels; executors, communication, implementation tactics, consensus, commitment;
organizational structure, and administrative systems as some of the factors that affect
strategy implementation. This approach of conducting literature review had limitations in
that the reviewers collected articles relying only on the databases of EBSCOhost, ProQuest
ABI, Sciencedirect, JSTOR and Wiley Interscience and thus may have overlooked crucial
view points on strategy implementation in monographs or practitioners books or view
points from actual empirical data as proposed in this study.
Zaribaf and Hamid (2010) studied the factor pattern affecting implementation of strategic
plans in Pasargad Bank branches in Tehran. The study sought to determine the effects of
leadership, organizational structure, human resources, information systems and technology,
on successful implementation of strategies in service sector. It concluded that all these
factors affect strategy implementation but their effects rates are different.
Wekesa (2013) conducted a study on the socio-economic factors affecting implementation
of humanitarian assistance programs with focus in the middle Shebelle region in Southern
Somalia. The study was limited to 60 humanitarian officers from FAO, UNHCR,
UNOCHA and UNICEF that implement humanitarian assistance programs in the Middle
Shebelle region. It did not cover the air services offered by UNHAS Somalia. Lack of
empirical findings specifically on the determinants of strategy implementation at United
Nations Humanitarian Air Services Somalia presents a knowldge gap. This study therefore
seeks to identify the determinants of strategy implementation at United Nations
Humanitarian Air Services in Somalia.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The main purpose of this study was to identify the determinants of strategy implementation
at United Nations Humanitarian Air services in Somalia.
6
1.4 Research Questions
1.4.1 Does Leadership affect strategy implementation?
1.4.2 How do organizational resources impact strategy implementation?
1.4.3 Is there a relationship between culture and strategy implementation?
1.5 Importance of the Study
The findings of the study will be of significance to the following stakeholders;
1.5.1 Employees of UNHAS Somalia
This study will help employees in the organization to understand the factors affecting
strategy implementation. This understanding will be a basis of establishing mitigation
measures against the inhibitors of strategy implementation for enhanced individual and
organizational performance.
1.5.2 WFP Somalia Management
The study will highlight the fundamental changes that are necessary in the organization for
successful strategy implementation. The information will be beneficial to the policy makers
in the sense that it will aid them to set policies that are specific to humanitarian air
operations.
1.5.3 Research and Academia
The study will provide opportunities for further possible research in the air transportation
industry and the humanitarian sector. The findings may form the basis upon which business
operations in the humanitarian air transport services may be analyzed and assessed.
1.6 Scope of the Study
The study was limited to the determinants of strategy implementation at WFP United
Nations Humanitarian Air Services Somalia. The population scope covered the main stream
employees involved in air transportation. The study was conducted in June 2015.
The study was expected to be limited by the unwillingness of the respondents to give full
information about their organization for fear of victimization. This was mitigated by
assuring the respondents before the study of the confidentiality of the information given.
Respondents were assured that the information given was only to be used for academic
purposes.
7
1.7 Definition of Terms
1.7.1 Strategic Management
Strategic management is the set of decisions and actions that result in the formulation and
implementation of plans designed to achieve a company’s objectives (Pearce & Robinson,
2007).
1.7.2 Strategy Implementation
For this study Strategy implementation refers to the process used to implement specific
firm policies, programs, and action plans across the organization (Harrington, 2004).
1.7.3 Culture
Culture is a system of shared values and beliefs that interacts with a company’s people,
organization structure and control systems to produce behavioral norms (Lund, 2008).
1.7.4 Service Firms
Refers to organizations that primarily earn their revenue by providing intangible products
and services (Kreitner, 2004).
1.7.5 Humanitarian Assistance
This is also called emergency aid and refers to rapid assistance given to people in immediate
distress by individuals, organizations, or governments to relieve suffering, during and after
man-made emergencies and natural disasters (Jaspers & Maxwell, 2008)
1.8 Chapter summary
This chapter has given an introduction of the study. It has highlighted the background of
the study and briefly discussed the problem statement. The chapter has also defined the
research questions that were used as a guide to this study. The chapter has also presented
the significance of the study, scope and terminologies to be used in the study. Chapter two
presents the literature review on what different authors have written about the determinants
of strategy implementation. Chapter three presents research methodology while chapter
four presents the findings of the study. Finally chapter five will present the study summary,
discussions, conclusions and recommendations.
8
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter reviews literature on factors affecting strategy implementation. The chapter is
arranged according to the research objectives. The section begins by focusing on the
relationship between leadership and strategy implementation followed by the illustration of
the link between organizational resources and strategy implementation. The chapter finally
focuses on the relationship between culture and strategy implementation.
2.2 Leadership on Strategy Implementation
Leadership is the process of influencing followers to attain organizational goals through
modifications (Lussier & Achua, 2009). Influencing is a process of conversing ideas,
increasing their reception and inspiring followers to uphold and execute the ideas. This is
made possible through change by manipulating through power, politics and discussions
(Lussier & Achua, 2009). According to Greenberg (2013), leadership is the use of non-
coercive influences to direct and coordinate the activities of group members toward goal
attainment. Leadership is responsible to direct the subordinates to perform the
organizational tasks effectively (Greenberg, 2013).
Within the context of an organisation, the broader leadership challenge in line with these
definition will then be to influence the employees and other followers to work towards
attaining the goals of the organisation. According to Lawson (2014), choices regarding
leadership strategy must be made, and they are not mutually exclusive. More than one
leadership strategy may be needed at any particular time which complicates leadership
because leaders must make informed choices and then synchronize and harmonize the
multiple strategies they select.
It is the role of the leader to try to fit the organization according to the requirement of the
situation. According to Gopinath (2013), top management leadership plays a critical role in
determining the success or failure of strategy implementation. Far too often strategy
implementation is delegated. When Leaders feel that they have have crafted the strategy,
they move on sure that most of their work is complete. Most implementation fail due to
lack of a comprehensive plan and the failure of leaders to take personal responsibility.
Speculand (2009) states that the same people who are involved in strategy crafting should
9
be involved in crafting and overseeing the strategy implementation. The leader of the
organization must be deeply engaged in the strategy. It is not top leaders formal strategies
that determine how business gets done but all the managers and leaders who make decisions
in a daily manner (Pella, Sumarwan & Daryanto, 2013).
According to Thompson et al. (2007), a leader should develop a broad network of contacts
and sources of information both formal and informal to stay on top of the execution
process.Thomson et al. (2007) further state that the best way for leaders to take charge is
by practising managing by walking around. This method requires leaders to make regular
visits to the field and engaging people at many different levels. This action generates
positive energy and help mobilize organization efforts behind strategy execution.
Hanson, Kararach and Shaw (2012) defined strategic leadership as the leader’s ability to
anticipate, envision and maintain flexibility and to empower others to create strategic
change as necessary. Empowerment occurs when employees are adequately trained,
provided with all relevant information and the best possible tools, fully involved in key
decisions and fairly rewarded for results (Kreitner, 2004). Hence, leadership is the
centerpiece from good to great (Lawson, 2014). From the concept of strategic leadership,
it is clear that for a leader to effectively spearhead implementation of strategy, the leader
needs to exhibity clear vision, comunication, adaptive to change and motivate followers
towards the implementation of the strategy.
2.2.1 Vision
To choose a direction, a leader must first have developed a mental image of a possible and
a desirable future state of the organization. A vision is a target that beckons, a condition
that does not presently exist and never existed before (Mintzberg, Ahlstrand & Lampel,
2009). Vision articulates a view of realistic, credible, attractive future for the organization,
a condition that is better in some important ways than what now exists (Mintzberg et al.,
2009).
The leader holds a clear vision in his or her mind and has the power to manage a team of
people that can help in the translation of the vision into reality. Thus, leadership is involved
with the identification of situation and the understanding of what is required at the present
as well as in the future.The leader should have the ability to create a vision that others can
10
believe in and adopt as their own. Such a vision is long-term in its orientation.With a vision,
the leader provides the all important bridge from the present to the future of the organization
(Mintzberg et al., 2009).
Leaders are therefore mandated with the role of creating a climate for change and provide
the vision for what change could accomplish. Organizations that lack depth in leadership
will struggle to implement strategies in contrast to those organizations where leadership
has been cultivated natured and carefully developed in the whole organization. Karami
(2007) argues that successful strategy implementation relies on the managerial ability to be
visionary, lead employees and assist redesign new products.
2.2.2 Motivation
It is the responsibility of leadership to motivate and inspire the people in the organization
to work jointly so that the organization’s vision can be translated into reality. Kreitner and
kinicki (2010) define motivation as the psychological process that cause the arousal,
direction and persistence of voluntary actions that are goal directed. It is the inner state that
causes an individual to behave in a way that ensures the accomplishment of some goal.
They note that motivated employees become empowered and focus their creativity and
commitment.
Strategy implementation is considered the most difficult stage because it involves dealing
with people who have varying levels of motivation, commitment and dedication. Quite
oftenly, these differences result in interpersonal conflicts that if left unresolved can affect
implementation efforts and performance (Lussier & Achua, 2009).Strategy implementation
efforts may fail if the strategy does not enjoy support and commitment by the majority of
employees and middle management, a fact which may be the case if they were not consulted
during the development phase (Henry, 2008). Strategy implementation requires galvanizing
the organisation employees and managers at all levels to turn the formulated strategies into
action. An excellent strategy that is poorly executed will yield the same poor result as a
bad strategy (Kachru, 2005).
Leadership should also strive to create a climate of organizational trust. A high degree of
trust is essential in strategy implementation (Pearce & Robinson, 2007). Trust acts as an
emotional glue that unites leaders and followers in a common purpose and helps to achieve
11
the outcomes of an organization strategy (Hrebiniak, 2008). On the contrary organizations
which lack trust end up cooperating under a system of formal rules and regulations which
must be negotiated, agreed to and even enforced if necessary through coercion.
2.2.3 Communication
Communication matters in the processes involved in implementing planned organizational
change. The outcomes that are achieved in the implementation of planned organizational
changes depend in part on the interactions of implementers and other important
stakeholders. Organizational scholars have long acknowledged the importance of
communication in explanations of organizational change processes (Forman & Argenti,
2005). According to Forman and Argenti (2005), communication efforts have provided
important insights into the invention, design, adoption, and user responses to change efforts
in organizations.
Communication is the process of conveying data, information, ideas, and thoughts from
one person to another (Phatak, Bhagat & Kashlak, 2005). It can take the form of writing,
listening, talking or through the internet. Pearce and Robinson (2007) have identified
communication as an important factor in strategy implementation. According to Alexander
(2003), communication was one of the most regularly mentioned factors, which was at the
background of the successful implementation of a strategy. This suggests that
communication played a key role towards the realization of organization strategic
objectives.
According to Riel and Fombrun (2007), communication consumes at least 75 percent of
each day’s work at all organizational levels. One measure of the effectiveness of corporate
communication is its ability to draw internal support from employees for the company’s
strategic objectives (Riel & Fombrun, 2007). Poor or ineffective communication from top-
down, bottom-up, across functions and division has negative effects on strategy
implementation. Heide, Gronhaug and Johannssen (2002) stated that communication faced
various related challenges. These problems could have been caused by the organization
structure which in turn led to the obstruction of the implementation of strategic actions that
had been planned. Joint communication and total understanding amongst human relations
is a significant feature in strategy implementation procedure (Pearce & Robinson, 2007).
12
Communication is seen not only as creating meaning but also as creating or constituting
social entities (Littlejohn & Foss, 2009). Communication becomes a symbol of
identification of a given group of people. Personal relationships and organizations are made
from communication. According to Zaribaf (2009), there exist a connection between
corporate strategy and corporate communication. He states that utilizing corporate
communication well is actually a management strategy itself since it includes the
determination of the constituencies. He further argues that expected responses to
communication with the current stakeholders inform the management strategy. According
to Riel and Fombrun (2007), corporate communication can only support strategy
implementation when senior corporate communication officers become key participants in
the strategy formulation process. They should seat on the strategic planning committee and
have close involvement in the strategy design and excecution.
Forman and Argenti (2005) observed that the measures linking the implementation of
strategies with the rationale communication of companies were apparent in that companies
were experiencing observable and significant strategic transformations. For example they
observed that these organizations had taken measures to ensure their communication
system was good. Information technology was the focal point in ensuring strategy and
building the firms reputation.
It is the duty of the leader to provide the instructions or directions to meet the requirements
of situation (Azhar, Ikram, Rashid &Saqib, 2012). Leaders should be able to communicate
the vision to the whole organization. Telling a good story can give life to the vision. It
captures hearts and minds and serves as a reminder to the vision because people find it
easier to remember a story than a statement. Leaders who do not communicate well are not
really leading at all. One of the best ways of communicating the vision is for the leader to
live himself according to the vision. The leader should walk the talk both as an individual
and as the leader. It will be meaningless for a leader to communicate the vision to his or
her team and claim to champion it yet employees see a different conduct from the leader
towards the vision. Leaders should bolster their talk through their behaviour (Deresky,
2008). The leader can also have one on one conversation with selected people who can
help to spread the vision in the company, build support and energy around the vision and
receive feedback.This demonstrates a sense of commitment to the overall organization
plans that can make other employees want to emulate the leaders commitment. During
13
vision communication the leader should give information in a way that all employees can
understand and be engaged. Employees should be able to see the purpose and meaning of
the vision in their daily activities. This helps employees to own the vision.
There exists barriers to organization communication.Communication barriers are reported
more frequently than any other type of barriers, such as organizational structure barriers,
learning barriers, personnel management barriers, or cultural barriers.These
communication barriers may be influenced by the organization structure. According to
Heide et al. (2002) communication barriers constitute the key barriers to the
implementation of the planned strategic objectives. They further add that barriers in
communication are experienced from encoding such as lack of sensitivity to receiver, lack
of basic communication skills, insufficient knowledge of the subject, information overload
and emotional interference. The second barriers to communication are transmitting barriers
which range from physical distractions, conflicting messages, channel barriers, and a long
communication chain. The final barriers are the response barriers which include no
provision for feedback and inadequate feedback.
Organization should strive to eliminate communication barriers when implementing
strategy. Heide et al. (2002) state that communication and shared understandings play an
important role in the implementation process. In particular, when vertical communication
is frequent, shared understanding about strategic priorities is enhanced and an organization
performance improves. Leaders need to be aware of the barriers that hinder the
organization from comunicating effectively.
2.2.4 Adaptive to Change
According to Yukl and Mahsud (2010), the concept of adaptive leadership has been shaped
by the fact that organizations are constantly under the influence of external and internal
factors such as increased globalization and international commerce, rapid technological
change, changing cultural values, a more diverse workforce, more use of outsourcing,
newforms of social networking, increased use of virtual interaction, more visibility of
leader actions (e.g., on the Internet), and concern for outcomes besides profits (e.g., ethical
actions, social responsibility, environmental impact, and sustainability. These changes
demands for flexibility, adaptation, and innovation by leaders.
14
A study by Umukoroa, Kuyeb and Sulaimon (2009) indicated that implementation of
strategy can be made more acceptable using programmed approach. Adaptation holds that
strategy implementation can be improved by processes that enable initial plans to be
adapted to resulting events.They argue that programmed and adaptive implementation
reflect different images of how strategy should be executed and how design choices (e.g.,
specificity of goals, management responsibilities, extent of staff participation, amount of
discretion allowed to deliverers, and type of evaluation) should be treated.
Yukl and Mahsud (2010) indicated that most leaders have responsibility for several diverse
tasks and they are faced with different tasks which usually require a different pattern of
leadership behavior. Moreover, they posit that subordinates commonly differ with regard
to their experience, skills, values and needs, and a leader’s behavior with different
individuals should vary accordingly.This therefore requires some degree of behavioral
flexibility and adaptability. To be adaptive, the selected behaviors must be relevant for the
situations in which they are used.
A study by Prewitt, Weil and McClure (2012) concludes that a complex adaptive systems
approach to strategic management is build upon organizational learning methods which
emphasizes mindfulness, mission, and values based decisions, fostering relationships and
systems of communication, and continuing to construct possibilities that contribute to an
organization’s self-organizing and resiliency in its immediate and distant environment.
They argued that a vision of a near or distant future and the strategic plan itself are not
blueprints for a future state but ways to prepare an organization to be more mindful of the
constant changes and possibilities happening in the present. Thus, for successful
implementation of strategic intent, leaders must be cognisant of the prevailing conditions
and adapt approprietly for the organization to achieve its objectives.
Hence, Umukoroa, Kuyeb and Sulaimon (2009) assert that strategy could be more
effectively carried out if implementation strategies are chosen to match the strategy
situation, especially the strategy's scope of change, its degree of technical certainty, the
extent of agreement about the strategy, the degree of coordination characteristic of the
implementing system and the stability of the strategy's environment.
15
2.3 Organization Resources on Strategy Implementation
Mintzberg et al. (2009) argued that a firm is a bundle of resources, both tangible and
intangible. These resources have to be properly managed for strategy implementation to be
succesful. According to Henry (2008), while the existence of resources is important,
resources per se do not confer any benefit to an organization. It is the efficient configuration
of resources that provides an organization with competencies. Henry (2008) views
resources as inputs that enable an organization to carry out its activities. He further argues
that resources in and off themselves confer no value to organizations. Resources only
become valuable after they have been put into production.
Valuable resources can take a variety of forms including some overlooked by the narrower
conceptions of core competence and capabilities. They can be tangible, intangible or
organizational capability. Henri (2008) defines tangible resources as the physical resources
that an organization possesses such as buildings, machinery, workforce and materials.
Intangible resources refer to those resources that are non-physical in nature such as brand
names, culture, knowledge and reputation.
Kachru (2005) stated that implementation involves the resources of the organization and
the way in which these resources reflect in the activities and choices required for the
execution of a strategic plan. In this context, resources may be thought as inputs that enable
an organization to carry out its activities. The resource based view defines resources as the
set of possessions and abilities either tangible or intangible which at the time is
competitively superior, limited, suitable and have the prospective to make value for
expansion (Pearce & Robinson, 2007).The organization is seen in terms of resources and
capabilities which can be configured or reconfigured to provide it with the competitive
advantage. Resources are described as the principles of the construction blocks of strategy
which recognize both what an organization wants to do as well as what it can do.
Intellectuals have affirmed that there should be a connection between an organizations
strategy and its resources.
There is a variety of classifications of organizations resources. Rainey and Steinbauer
(1999) classified the organizational resources as financial, human, and technological
resources. Bozeman and Straussman (1990) classification had personnel resources,
financial resources, and organizational structure. Russo and Fouts (1997) classification
16
included physical assets and technologies, human resources and organizational capabilities,
and the intangible resources of reputation and political acumen. Fry, Stoner and Hattwick
(2004) classified organizational resources into people, physical materials, financial assets,
and information. Lee (2009) expanded the classification into six types of resources. They
included administrative (structural) resources; human resources; financial resources;
physical resources; political resources; and reputation resources.
In this study, effects of four types of organizational resources on strategy implementation
are evaluated. The resources include human resources, financial resources, organizational
structure (Bozeman & Straussman 1990; Lee, 2009) and information system as a resource
(Steinbauer 1999; Russo and Fouts, 1997).
2.3.1 Human Resources
Strategy implementation is best accomplished through high performing people. One of the
major reasons why strategy implementation fails is because the human factor is
conspicuously absent right from strategic planning. It is desirable to create a fit between
the intended strategy and the specific personality profile of the implementation key players
in different organization departments (Raps, 2005). For a company to be successful, it must
have the right people. That means attracting them, training them, and developing them over
time (Michlitsch, 2000). Organizations with competent employees are more likely to be
succesful in strategy implementation when compared to those organisations with
employees that lack strategy skills. Competencies are the glue that binds existing operations
and also the engine for new business development (Mintzberg et al., 2009).
Employees should understand how they can influence the succesful implementation of the
strategy. Strategy focussed organizations understand that ultimately employees tasked with
implementing strategy are often the ones who come up with the innovative ideas that make
strategy work (Kaplan & Norton, 2011). The executive must use communication processes
at the launch of the new strategy to ensure employees understand the message, believe in
the strategy and their willingness to teach others about it. According to Kaplan and Norton
(2011) employees must be aligned to the strategy in order to create value. They further
suggested that organization should use the balanced score card strategy implementation
tool to create strategic awareness, defining personal and team objectives and linking
incentives and compensation.
17
Chandler (1962) posits that once a firm has formulated the goals it wants to achieve the
next task will be the development of an appropriate environment to enable the effective
coordination of resources including human resources. Lynch, Keller and Ozment (2000)
argue that it is the people that implement strategies, not plans and machinery nor financial
resources. The management most succesful strategy implementation tool is a system of
rewards and incentives tied tightly to the achievement of the targeted strategic performance.
Pearce and Robinson (2007) state that implementing a strategy depends on the members of
the organization and in particular the key managers. The single most powerful tool that
management can utilize to gain employee commitment to carrying out the strategy is
linking the reward system to strategic relevant performance outcomes (Pearce & Robinson,
2007).
2.3.2 Financial Resources
Financial resources have a critical importance in strategy implementation. The desired
strategy must be rooted in what is financially feasible in the organization. The money or
assets that are used to reimburse or finance the organization doings is referred to as the
finance resources (Homburg, Krohmer & Workman, 2004).The basic assumption is that all
strategy implementation activities attract some expenditure. Therefore, for these activities
to be carried out successfully, financial allocation plays a critical role.
Zaribaf and Hamid (2010) posit that while providing financial resources (budgeting) which
to support strategies, care should be taken to ensure that financial resources are allocating
to units in appropriate to their contribution of strategic role and that consuming resources
(inputs) will cause desired outputs. They conclude that successful implementing of
strategies results from integrating and coordination of technological innovations,
production processes, marketing, financing and personnel to achieve the defined goals.
The budgeting staff must have the expertise to assign the correct amount required during
the implementation phase. This may require shifting finances or acquiring new resources
to support strategic goals (Homburg et al., 2004). For organizations with small amounts of
restricted financial support, aligning resources to the strategy may require mobilization of
funds aggressively to support the strategic priorities and initiatives so that funding
restrictions do not slow down the implementation progress. The manner in which it is
18
obtained can also make it harder or easier to further resources in the future. The study
hypothesize that sound financial management is required to oversee the implementation of
a chosen strategy.
2.3.3 Information System
The power to collect, assess, and disseminate information is a valuable strategic resource
that any organization can use to improve implementation of its strategies and gain
competitive advantage (Gaines, Hoover, Foxx, Matuszek, & Morrison, 2012). According
to Reddy, Srinivasu, Rikkula and Rao (2009), an effective information system provides the
means of effective and efficient coordination between departments; quick and reliable
referencing; access to relevant data and documents; use of less labour; improvement in
organizational and departmental techniques; management of day-to-day activities (as
accounts, stock control, payroll, etc.); day-to-day assistance in a department and closer
contact with the rest of the world.
In this way, an information system provides the mechanism to ensure that information is
available to the managers in the form they want it and when they need it. Information
systems therefore aim to support the work of managers through providing relevant
information for their decision-making (Reddy et al., 2009). Maddison and Darnton (1996)
defined information system as a collection of people or equipment that performs purposeful
operations on information and is primarily concerned with internal circulation of
information and form a critical organizational success factor.
According to Ali, Mohamad and Tretiakov (2013), the growing importance of Information
System (IS) to support business operation demands for adequate IS planning. They note
that good IS planning enables organizations to closely align the IS and strategic business
objectives. Such alignment ultimately ensures organizations gain in the implementation of
its strategies. An effective information system ensures lack of information ambiguity. The
ambiguity may arise where problems cannot be empirically and explicitly understood or
analyzed and gathering more data about them is not possible. Another important matter that
displays the role of information systems in implementing strategy is manager’s need to
reciprocal exchange of information (Maddison & Darnton, 1996). It means a system that
transmits information up and downward.
19
The role of information system as an instrument for collecting, organizing and diseminating
management information has been widely recognized in literature. Issa-Salwe, Ahmed,
Aloufi and Kabir (2010) posit that today it is widely recognised that information systems
knowledge is essential for managers because most organisations need information systems
to survive and prosper. They allude that in the modern times, information systems have
become an essential part of all types of business as information systems provide the
opportunity for organisations to integrate with and implement their business strategies
effectively.
According to Al-Mamary, Shamsuddin and Aziati (2013), data being the lifeblood of
today’s organizations, an effective and efficient management of data is considered an
integral part of organizational strategy. They posit that successful organizations should
collect high quality data which will lead to high quality of information and for a successful
and effective managerial decision making, it is necessary to provide accurate, timely and
relevant information to decision makers. Hence, an effective information system takes
internal data from the system and summarizes it to meaningful and useful forms as
management reports to use in managerial decision making. This means that management
information system improves information quality and subsequently affects managerial
decision-making.
Therefore strategy implementation just like any other organizational activities requires that
the organizations identify their organizational portfolio information system that could help
the organizations in executing their business plans and achieving their business objectives
(Ali et al., 2013). In this way strategic information system is instrumental in helping
organizations in implementing their strategies and to achieve the organization’s business
objectives and mission.
2.3.4 Organizational Structure
Pearce and Robinson (2007) defined an organizational structure as the formalized
arrangement of interaction between responsibility of tasks, people and resources in an
organization. Scholars have seen a proper strategy structure alignment as a necessary
precursor to the successful implementation of new business environment (Mazzola &
Kellerman, 2010). Olsona, Slater and Hult (2005) classified structural dimensions which
20
are key to strategy implementation and influence communication, coordination and
decision making into three; formalization, centralization and specialization.
According to Olsona et al. (2005) formalization refers to the degree to which decisions and
working relationships are governed by formal rules and procedures. They explain that rules
and procedures provide a means for defining appropriate behaviors and routine aspects of
a problem can be dealt with easily through the application of rules. In this way rules enable
individuals to organize their activities to benefit themselves and the organization. Further,
rules are a form of organizational memory and enable businesses to fully exploit previous
discoveries and innovations. Formal rules and procedures can also lead to increased
efficiency and lower administrative costs (Olsona et al., 2005).
According to Pearce and Robinson (2007) high formalisation reduces the capacity for
improvision and creating new competencies. The structure is therefore to assist with
routine problems but it is unable to cope with new ideas. This therefore reinforces past
behaviours and inhibits rapid response to the competitive environment. On the other hand,
organic structures with fewer formal procedures encourage horizontal and vertical
communication and flexible roles with the net effect of achieving efficiency of a functional
organization and the market effectiveness of a divisional form (Olsona et al., 2005). The
structure therefore leads to rapid awareness of and response to competitive market changes,
more effective information sharing, and a reduction in the lag between decision and action.
The second dimension of structure is centralization. Centralization refers to whether
decision authority is closely held by top managers or is delegated to middle and lower level
managers (Olsona et al., 2005). According to Pearce and Robinson (2007) a highly
centralised structure is very demanding on the owner. On the other hand, a functional
organisation structure delegates and differentiates the day to day operating decisions. In
this way, the divisional structures liberates the chief executive officer for broader strategic
decisions though it creates room for potential inconsistency among divisions. The matrix
structure maximizes efficient use of funtional managers as well as giving the middle level
managers broader exposure to strategic issues. Olsona et al. (2005) posit that while fewer
innovative ideas might be put forth in centralized organizations, implementation tends to
be straight forward once a decision is made. This benefit, however, is primarily realized in
stable, non-complex environments.
21
The third dimesion of the organizational structure is specialization. According to Kimiti,
Okello and Karanja (2014, specialization defines the degree to which departments and
employees are functionally specialized or integrated. The term may also mean the degree
to which tasks are divided in the organization. Kimiti et al. (2014) posit that functional
specialization allows organization members to concentrate on the execution of specified
and narrowly defined tasks and to accumulate task-related knowledge, and thus it enhances
information- processing capabilities.
2.4 Organizational Culture on Strategy Implementation
Culture is a pattern of shared tacit assumptions that is learned by a group as it solved its
problems of external adaptation and internal integration that has worked well enough to be
considered valid and therefore taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think
and feel in relation to those problems (Schein, 2009). According to Chegini (2010),
organization culture is the beliefs, values and practices which form the characteristics of an
organization. Lund (2003) looks at the concept in a broader sense defining it as a system of
shared values and beliefs that interacts with a company’s people, organization structure and
control systems to produce behavioral norms.
Culture grows up over many years of operation. It must first be analyzed at the molecular
level before using it to achieve an organization’s purpose. According to Hickman and Silva
(1989), cultures just like the personalities of individuals take a long time to develop and a
long time to change. They further add that in most cases you can achieve better results by
using an existing culture, good or bad than by destroying an old culture and building a new
one. Every organization regardless of size has a culture that influences how people behave
in a variety of areas such as customer service, standard of performance and innovation
(Flamholtz & Randle, 2011). In much the same way as personality influences the behaviour
of an individual, the shared assumptions among a firm’s members influence opinions and
actions within that firm. Positive influences in strategy process will align the employees
behaviour towards the desired change.
Pearce and Robinson (2007) state that employees become fundamentally committed to the
corporate values and beliefs which they internalise and hold on to become their personal
beliefs and values. They further add that employees will also derive satisfaction from the
22
organization actions simply because they find them to be congruent with their personal
values and beliefs. The shared, internalized beliefs and values shape and account for the
strength of an organization culture ( Pearce & Robinson, 2007).
For the purpose of describing the values and beliefs underlying an organization’s culture,
the Competing Values Framework (CVF) developed by Cameron and Quinn (1999) is
adopted. It has been widely used to examine organizational culture in the literature (Karimi
& Kadir, 2012; Ahmadi, Salamzadeh, Daraei, & Akbari, 2012).
Figure 2.1: CVF framework (Cameron and Quinn, 1999)
By considering two dimensions, stability versus flexibility and internal focus versus
external position, Cameron and Quinn (1999) proposed a model (Figure 2.1) which
describes four types of culture: Hierarchy, clan, market and adhocracy. According to
Karimi and Kadir (2012), in each of the four quadrants shown in above figure a
representative (although not exhaustive) list of characteristics associated with each cultural
orientation are provided. For example, Clan [human development, team work,
commitment, loyalty, personal relations, mentoring]; Hierarchy [Security, stability, formal
rules, internal efficiency, control and structure, coordination]; Adhocracy [Uniqueness, risk
taking, leadership, innovation, entrepreneurship]; Market [Achievement, goal
accomplishment, market leadership, results oriented, competiveness, aggressivness]. This
study looks into four culture dimensions one from each of the four quadrant. That is, Team
work, Stability, Risk taking and Result oriented.
Clan Adhocracy
Hierarchy Market
Flexibility
Stability
External Focus Internal Focus
23
2.4.1 Teamwork
Quick and Nelson (2013) define team work as joint action by a group of people in which
individual interests are subordinated to team unity. They further add that teams are useful
in performing work that is complicated, complex, interrelated and more voluminous than
one person can handle. The achievements of an organization are the results of the combined
efforts of each individual in the organization working toward common objectives (Saloner,
Shepard & Podolony, 2001).
Li, Guohui and Eppler (2008) explain that the process of interaction and participation
among the members of an organization team typically leads to greater commitment to the
firm’s goals and strategies and thus serves to ensure the successful implementation of the
firm’s chosen strategy. They also reported that strongly committed decision teams reported
more effective implementation than did the less committed groups. Therefore, the shared
understanding of middle management and those at the operational level to the top
management teams strategic goals is of critical importance to effective implementation of
strategies.
The general presumption is that organizations that have team work as a core value produce
valuable innovations and experience high performances that help them in meeting the set
targets. Successful teams require an effective leader whose task is to bring the team to
maturity; help it work through interpersonal, task and authority issues and be skilled in
nurturing a cohesive and effective team. Hands-on skills of direct involvement and full
membership are essential in running the activities of an organization.
2.4.2 Stability
Lunenburg (2010) attest that given a choice, organizations prefer stability to change
because the more predictable and routine activities are, the higher the level of efficiency
that can be obtained. Thus, the status quo is preferred in many cases. Duke (2011) however
cautions that organizations are not static, but continuously change in response to a variety
of forces coming from both inside and outside the organization. Furthermore strategy
implementation is a change process in itself. It creates a new way of doing things in the
organization. Therefore a culture of stability and maintaining things as they are would be
antagonistic to the process of strategy implementation.
24
Looking at strategy implementation as a change process, Mutihac (2010) alluded that the
change process in organizations is highly dependent on the members of the organization
and their behaviour towards change. She explains that the behavioural approach focuses on
change on the basis of individual behaviours and their effects on other individual’s
behaviour in order to reach the intended result. Therefore, the failure or success of reaching
the intended results should be analyzed in the behaviours of individuals and the conditions
(Cameron & Green, 2004). According to Mutihac (2010), by creating suitable environment
and functional intervention strategies, change can be managed and organizational
development might be achieved.
Spector (2011) and Fullan (2011) conclude that in strategy implementation, change is
inevitable. Likewise resistance to change is also inevitable since its human tendency to
resist change, because it forces people to adopt new ways of doing things. They cite the
most powerful impediments to change as uncertainty, concern over personal loss, group
resistance, dependence, trust in administration, and awareness of weaknesses in the
proposed change. It is therefore imperative for managers to clearly understand why people
prefer status quo and resist change so as to effectively cope with the resistance and enhance
the results of the strategy implementation (Lunenburg, 2010).
2.4.3 Risk Taking Culture
Protiviti Consulting Group (2014) defined risk culture as the set of encouragement and
acceptable behaviours, discussions and attitudes towards taking and managing risk within
an institution that reflects the shared values, goals, practices, and reinforcement
mechanisms that embed risks into the institution’s decision making process and risk
management into day to day operations. On the other hand Hyrsky and Tuunanen (1999),
defined risk taking as the perceived possibility of receiving the rewards associated with
success of a proposed situation, which is required by an individual before he can subject
himself to the consequences associated with failure, the alternative situation providing less
reward as well as less severe consequence than the proposed situation.
The general assumption is that risk attitude is a crucial variable in management decision
making and according to the risk propensity (an individual’s attitude toward risk), risk is
among the personality traits associated with strategic configurations i.e. individuals with
25
high risk propensity feel comfortable in uncertain situations. Protiviti Consulting Group
(2014) posits that an open and collaborative risk culture is stimulated through an enterprise
wide commitment to excellence. They note that the commitment starts with a focus on
cultivating an effective learning environment and a pursuit of continuous improvement.
Since strategy implementation comes with a certain degree of uncertainty coupled with
ambiguous environment, this exercise inevitably carries risk elements. Roomi and Harrison
(2010) alluded that when leaders have higher risk-taking, pro-activeness and
innovativeness, they can stimulate their teams to be more creative during the strategy
implementation and product development process. They argue that raising these behaviours
in the leader will tend to be accompanied by elevated creativity in teams.
2.4.4 Results Oriented Culture
Results orientation culture is a culture dimension that measures the level of productivity or
performance expected inside an organization. Vähämäki, Schmidt and Molander, (2011)
explains that results based management is a management strategy aimed at achieving
important changes in the way organisations operate, with improving performance in terms
of results as the central orientation. To achieve this, results oriented management provides
the management framework with tools for strategic planning, risk management,
performance monitoring and evaluation. Vähämäki et al. (2011) continue that the primary
purpose of results based management is to improve efficiency and effectiveness through
organisational learning, and secondly to fulfil accountability obligations through
performance reporting.
To put results oriented dimension into perspective, Beshay and Sixsmith (2008) draws a
parallel between process oriented organization and results oriented organizations. They
assert that a process oriented organization is one where each day is just as the one before,
risks are avoided and not much effort is put into the job while results oriented organizations
on the other hand is where each day is new with great challenges, maximum effort is put in
and people are comfortable with working in a challenging, changing environment.
A study by Al-alak and Tarabieh (2011) attest that results orientation is important for
organizations to compete against one another in the worldwide global market. They posit
that due to rapid changes facing organizations, results orientation requires a clear
26
understanding of both the present and future dynamic conditions within and outside the
organization. This understanding will enable the decision makers to align the situation to
the intended results. In strategy implementation, this means that as the situation changes
during the implementation process, a result oriented organizational culture will keep the
strategy implementers on the original goals. It offers the edge to adjust to change while still
focusing on the intended outcome.
2.5 Chapter Summary
This chapter presented a review of literature on factors affecting strategy implementation.
The chapter commenced with an introduction followed by strategy implementation
overview, the influence of leadership, resources, and culture on strategy implementation.
The success of strategy implementation comes not from a secret but from the exquisite
attention organizations pay to aligning the leadership, resources, and culture to the strategy.
The next chapter is chapter three. It will outline the methodology that will be used for this
study.
27
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the research design, population and sampling techniques, the
instruments for data collection, research procedures and data analysis methods.
3.2 Research Design
Research design is a blue print for the collection, measurement and analysis of data. It is
the plan and structure of investigations conceived to obtain the answers to the research
questions (Cooper & Schindler, 2008).
The study used descriptive research design. The design describes well the relationship
between two or more variables. This design was appropriate as it was critical in
investigating the presence or absence of relationship between variables (Cooper &
Schindler, 2008). It helped in exploring the relationship between strategy implementation
and leadership, resources and culture. The dependent variable in this study was Strategy
Implementation while the independent variables were leadership, resources and culture.
3.3 Population and Sampling Design
3.3.1 Population
According to Kothari (2004), target population refers to all the members of a real or
hypothetical set of people, events or subjects to which the researcher wants to generalize
the results of the study. In this study the total population was all WFP employees based in
Nairobi and Somalia. The researcher examined a sample to make conclusions about the
large population.
Table 3.1 Population Distribution
Category Population Percentage
Senior level management 23 11.5%
Middle level management 86 43%
General staff 91 45.5%
Total 200 100%
Source: WFP (2014)
28
3.3.2 Sampling Design
3.3.2.1 Sampling Frame
According to Cooper and Schindler (2008), sampling frame is the source material or device
from which a sample is drawn. It is a list of all those within a population who can be
sampled. In this study the sampling frame comprised all WFP employees based in Nairobi
and Somalia.
3.3.2.2 Sampling Technique
This study used stratified random sampling. Cooper and Schindler (2008) state that
stratified sampling gives statistical efficiency increase on a sample, provides adequate data
for analyzing the various sub-population and enables different research methods to be used
in different strata. This technique allows the researcher to divide the sample into appropriate
strata that are mutually exclusive. The staff was divided according to the management level;
senior level managers, middle level managers and general staff. A sample was drawn
proportionately according to the category’s representation.
3.3.2.3 Sample Size
This is a subset or any combination of sampling units that does not include the entire set of
sampling units that has been defined as the population of a sampling unit from a population
(Garson, 2012). According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) a representative sample size
of 30% of the total population is sufficient to draw conclusions about the study population.
For this study, 30% of 200 employees which translates into 60 employees were drawn to
form the sample size.
Table 3.2 Sample Size
Category Sampling
frame
Percentage Sample Size Percentage
Senior level management 23 11.5% 14 3.45%
Middle level
management
86 43.5% 16 12.9%
General Staff 91 45.5% 20 13.7
Total 200 100% 60 30%
Source: WFP(2014).
29
3.4 Data Collection
The choice of research instruments depends on the type of data to be collected. A
questionnaire was used for collecting primary data from the respondents. The primary data
was significant in expressing the actual scenario of the relationship between the dependent
and independent variables. The use of questionnaire was justified because it provided a
cheap, effective and efficient way of gathering information within a very short period of
time.
The questions were designed to be both open and close ended. The questionnaires were
distributed to all levels of employment. The questions were divided into two sections; the
first section comprised the demographic information of the respondents while the last
section addressed the research questions of the study. The closed ended questions were in
the form of a five point Likert scale. The scale gave the respondents an option to express
their opinions on a scale of 1 to 5.
3.5 Research Procedures
The questionnaire was pretested to ascertain the suitability of the tool before the actual
administration. According to Cooper and Schindler (2008), pretesting enhances the
reliability of the data collected for the research. The questionnaire were given to six
respondents selected randomly during pretesting. Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) indicate
that 1% of the sample size is sufficient to use as pilot. The six were considered sufficient.
The time frame for completing the questionnaire was estimated to take fifteeen minutes. A
letter of introduction was attached to the questionnaire explaining the purpose of the study.
The researcher acquired the services of an assistant to administer the questionnaire. The
respondents were assured of confidentially and anonimity to ensure a high rate of response
3.6 Data Analysis Methods
The primary data collected by the questionnaire were coded and entered into Statistical
Package for Social Science (SPSS). Where the respondents were found to have offered
answers which were not clear or incomplete, call-backs were made to those individual
respondents to fill the gaps before data analysis. This was to ensure completeness of the
information collected.
30
Descriptive statistics in form of frequencies and percentages was used to analyse the
descriptive elements of the study. Correlations were calculated to draw inferences to the
entire population. The findings of the study were presented in form of table and figures for
ease of interpretation and understanding.
3.7 Chapter Summary
This chapter has stated the research methodology of the study. Aspects of the population,
sampling methods, data collection instruments, technique and procedures and data analysis
were mentioned. The researcher outlined the approach used and the reasons for choosing
the designs used in the study.
31
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction
The purpose of this study was to identify the determinants of strategy implementation at
United Nations Humanitarian Air services Somalia. The study was guided by the following
research questions. Does Leadership affect strategy implementation? How do
organizational resources impact strategy implementation? Is there a relationship between
culture and strategy implementation? Chapter four presents the findings of the study. The
chapter is arranged in line with the research questions. The first section gives findings on
the demographic characteristics of the study population. The second part covers the role of
leadership. The third section covers the influence of organizational resources on strategy
implementation while the fourth section gives findings on the influence of culture on
strategy implementation. The last section presents the chapter summary.
4.2 Demographics
4.2.1 Response Rate
Sixty questionnaires were distributed to the sample size. Figure 4.1 shows that the study
achieved 75% response rate.
Figure 4.1: Response Rate
4.2.2 Gender
Figure 4.2 shows how the gender of the respondents was represented. 67% of the
respondents were males while females were 33%.
Filled questionnaires
75%
Unreturned questionnaires
25%
32
Figure 4.2: Gender of the Respondents
4.2.3 Management Level
Figure 4.3 shows that majority of the respondents were general staff at 63% followed by
middle level managers at 30% and senior managers at 7%.
Figure 4.3: Management Level
4.2.4 Length of Service
Figure 4.4 shows that majority of the respondents had served in the organization for more
than 10 years [33%] followed by 1 to 3 years [25%], 7-9 years [22%] and 4 to 6 years
[18%].
Male67%
Female33%
Senior managers7%
Middle level managers
30%General staff
63%
33
Figure 4.4: Length of Service
4.2.5 Highest Education Level
Table 4.1 shows that 42% of the respondents had bachelor’s degrees as their highest
education level, 27% diploma, 24% masters, secondary certificate 4% and 2% doctorate
degrees.
Table 4.1: Highest Education Level
Education Level Percentage [%]
Secondary Certificate 4
Diploma 27
Bachelor’s Degree 42
Masters Degree 24
Doctorate Degree 2
Total 100
4.3 Leadership on Strategy Implementation
Before the actual analysis, the instrument was subjected to reliability test. First the
reliability of the dependent variable [strategy implementation] was tested. Table 4.2
indicates that Cronbach's alpha is 0.857, which indicates a high level of internal consistency
for the scale. Table 4.2 also shows that the item-total correlation ranges from 0.519 to 0.786
and that removal of any question would result in a lower Cronbach's alpha except for the
question that strategy implementation decision is based on strategic plans [0.863] whose
Less than 1 year2%
1-3 years25%
4-6 years18%
7-9 years22%
More than 10 years33%
34
deletion increases the alpha. This increase is minimal therefore; all the questions were
retained in the construct.
Table 4.2: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Strategy Implementation Items Scale
Strategy Implementation Corrected
Item-Total
Correlatio
n
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
Cronba
ch’s
Alpha
Strategy
Implement
ation
Strategy implementation decision is based on
strategic plans .519 .863
0.857
There are measurable performance standards for
each planned strategy implementation element .786 .800
Employees other key stakeholders accept the
rationale for strategy change .643 .837
There are organized performance standards for
monitoring strategy implementation .748 .808
There is no gap between ability to formulate
strategy and sound implementation of strategy .701 .823
Table 4.3 indicates that Cronbach's alpha for the individual sub variables range from 0.673
to 0.838, which indicates a high level of internal consistency for the scale. Table 4.3 also
shows that the item-total correlation ranges from -0.089 to 0.814 and that removal of any
question would result in a lower Cronbach's alpha except for the question that Leaders are
never satisfied but are always content with where the organization is. This question was
thus removed from the construct of vision as to reduce reliability of the construct. The
analysis then involved descriptive statistics by use of frequencies, percentages and means.
35
Table 4.3: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Leadership Items
Scale
Leadership and Strategy implementation
Corrected Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if
Item Deleted
Cronbach’s Alpha
Leadership on
Strategy
Implementatio
n
Vision
0.673
Leaders have clear picture of the
organization’s future .738 .394
Leaders are optimistic of the
organization’s future .737 .405
Top management are consumed with making tomorrow a better day
.609 .495
Leaders are never satisfied but are always content with where the organization is
-.089 .892**
Motivation
0.838
Management are focused in unique strengths of each employee
.743 .802
Opinion of every employee counts .814 .770
Clear goals are set for each employee .540 .832
I feel recognized in this organization .724 .810
Communication
0.824
Leaders speak with security and confidence
.652 .782
Management team are brilliant and informative
.716 .745
Management takes time to listen to
other employees opinions .617 .795
Top management are always
passionate of the organization’s mission and vision
.628 .786
Adaptive to Change
0.79
I am encouraged to experiment with new ideas
.578 .693
Employees are often deployed from one department to another
.518 .724
Leaders are able to synthesize complex insights and make high-quality decisions quickly
.574 .693
There is a well-established customized data mining, market research, dashboards, and war rooms for
scenario planning
.561 .701
4.3.1 Vision Setting
The summated scale in Table 4.4 shows that majority agreed [40% agreed; 30% strongly
agreed] that leadership at UNHAS affect strategy implementation by setting the
organization’s vision. Table 4.4 further shows that setting of the organizational vision is
achieved since the leaders have a clear picture of the organization’s future [41% agreed;
36
34% strongly agreed]; leaders are optimistic of the organization’s future [46% agreed; 25%
strongly agreed]; and since top management are consumed with making tomorrow a better
day [32% agreed; 30% strongly agreed].
Table 4.4: Vision Setting Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
Leaders have clear picture of the organization’s future 0 11 14 41 34 3.98
Leaders are optimistic of the organization’s future 0 11 18 46 25 3.84
Top management are consumed with making tomorrow
a better day
0 9 30 32 30 3.82
Summated Scale 0 10 21 40 30 3.88
4.3.2 Motivation
The summated scale in Table 4.5 shows that leadership affect strategy implementation by
playing some motivation role at UNHAS [30% agreed; 10% strongly agreed]. Table 4.5
further shows that majority agreed that management are focused in unique strengths of each
employee [32% agreed; 4% strongly agreed]; and that leaders set clear goals for each
employee [39% agreed; 11% strongly agreed]. On the other hand Table 4.5 indicates that
majority disagreed [41% disagreed; 4% strongly disagreed] that opinions of every
employee counts at UNHAS while majority were neutral [43%] that they feel recognized
in the organization.
Table 4.5: Motivation Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
Management are focused in unique strengths of each
employee
4 27 32 32 4 3.05
Opinion of every employee counts 4 41 23 27 4 2.86
Clear goals are set for each employee 0 28 28 39 11 3.39
I feel recognized in this organization 2 11 43 23 20 3.48
Summated Scale 3 27 31 30 10 3.20
37
4.3.3 Communication
The summated scale in Table 4.6 shows that majority agreed [42% agreed; 21% strongly
agreed] that leadership at UNHAS affect strategy implementation through effective
communication. Majority agreed that leaders speak with security and confidence [50%
agreed; 21% strongly agreed]; Management team are brilliant and informative [37%
agreed; 27% strongly agreed]; Management takes time to listen to other employees opinions
[36% agreed; 11% strongly agreed]; Top management are always passionate of the
organization’s mission and vision [45% agreed; 25% strongly agreed].
Table 4.6: Communication Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
Leaders speak with security and confidence 0 6 23 50 21 3.84
Management team are brilliant and informative 0 18 16 37 27 3.75
Management takes time to listen to other employees
opinions
2 30 21 36 11 3.25
Top management are always passionate of the
organization’s mission and vision
0 14 16 45 25 3.82
Summated Scale 1 17 19 42 21 3.67
4.3.4 Adaptive Change
Despite the fact that Table 4.7 shows that majority agreed that they are encouraged to
experiment with new ideas [35% agreed; 5% strongly agreed] and that leaders are able to
synthesize complex insights and make high-quality decisions quickly [36% agreed; 18%
strongly agreed], the summated scale in Table 4.7 shows that the respondents were neutral
as to whether the leadership at UNHAS are adaptive to change [28% agreed; 22%
disagreed]. The table also shows that majority disagreed that employees are often deployed
from one department to another [27% disagreed; 32% strongly disagreed].
38
Table 4.7: Adaptive Change Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
I am encouraged to experiment with new ideas 7 23 30 35 5 3.07
Employees are often deployed from one department to
another
32 27 23 18 0 2.27
Leaders are able to synthesize complex insights and
make high-quality decisions quickly
4 16 25 36 18 3.48
There is a well-established customized data mining,
market research, dashboards, and war rooms for
scenario planning
11 20 36 23 9 2.98
Summated Scale 14 22 28 28 8 2.95
4.3.5 Correlation Matrix for Leadership Roles
The study then sought to identify whether there was a statistically significant relationship
between the variables and the dependent variable [Strategy implementation]. Bivariate
analysis was carried out to identify the relationships. Table 4.8 shows that (vision setting,
motivation, communication) displayed statistically significant positive correlation with
strategy implementation. Vision setting had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation (r=0.664; p<0.01), Communication had a moderate positive correlation
with strategy implementation (r=0.475; p<0.01), while adaptability to change did not have
statistically significant relationship with strategy implementation (r=0.179; p>0.01).
Further, the variables of vision, motivation and communication significantly correlate with
one another in the model.
39
Table 4.8: Correlation Matrix for the Roles of Leadership Vision Motivation Communica
tion
Adaptiv
e to
change
Strategy
Implement
ation
Vision Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed)
N 44
Motivatio
n
Pearson Correlation .562** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 44 44
Communi
cation
Pearson Correlation .726** .633** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 44 44 44
Adaptive
to change
Pearson Correlation .474** .514** .470** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .000 .001
N 43 43 43 43 Strategy
implement
ation
Pearson Correlation .664** .475** .508** .179 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001 .000 .251
N 44 44 44 43 44
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.3.6 Multiple Regression Analysis for Leadership Roles
Multiple regressions were therefore used to examine the ability of vision setting,
motivation, communication and adaptive to change in predicting the success of strategy
implementation at UNHAS. Since adaptability to change did not have any statistically
significant relationship with strategy implementation, it was excluded from the regression
analysis. Table 4.9 shows that three independent variables that were included in the model
when considered independently, explain only 45.6% of the success of strategy
implementation as represented by the R2. This therefore means the three contribute about
45.6% of the success of strategy implementation
Table 4.9: Coefficient of Determination (R2) for Leadership Roles
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .676a .456 .416 .517
a. Predictors: (Constant), Communication, Motivation, Vision
The regression results in Table 4.10 shows that if all the other factors are zero, the influence
of leadership on strategy implementation will be 1.893. The table also shows that a unit
increase in effective vision setting will lead to a 0.442 increase in success of strategy
implementation; a unit increase in motivation will lead to a 0.120 increase in success of
40
strategy implementation while a unit increase in effective communication will lead to a
0.015 increase in success of strategy implementation. This infers that effective vision
setting contributed more to the success of strategy implementation followed by motivation
and effective communication.
Table 4.10: Multiple Regression Analysis for Leadership Roles
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 1.893 .365 5.181 .000
Vision .442 .129 .591 3.421 .001
Motivation .120 .118 .156 1.015 .316
Communication .015 .139 .020 .109 .914
4.4 Organizational Resources on Strategy Implementation
Table 4.11 indicates that Cronbach's alpha for the individual sub variables range from 0.725
to 0.872, which indicates a high level of internal consistency for the scale. Table 4.11 also
shows that the item-total correlation ranges from 0.370 to 0.819 and that removal of any
question would result in a lower Cronbach's alpha. Thus deleting any question weakens
the reliability of the construct. Therefore, all questions were considered for analysis.
41
Table 4.11: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Organizational Resources Test Items
Scale
Organizational Resources and Strategy implementation
Corrected Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if
Item Deleted
Cronbach’s Alpha
Organizational
Resources on
Strategy
Implementation
Human Resources
0.872
We have optimal staffing level .589 .886
All staff members are well informed with the organizations vision and mission
.803 .804
Staff have the right knowledge for strategy implementation
.741 .831
Employees have the right skills in
implementing strategic activities .787 .810
Financial Resources
0.798
My organization has set aside enough
resources in its budget for strategy implementation
.515 .779
Sufficient time is allocated strategy
implementation .625 .745
Funding for all activities implemented .716 .718
Finance department releases funds at
the right time .379 .815
All strategic activities are sufficiently funded at all levels of the organization
.687 .723
Information Systems
0.859
Ease of accessing work related information within the organization when needed
.710 .818
Information system is simple to use .688 .828
Information system is secure .608 .858
I normally get accurate information
from my organization’s information system
.819 .773
Organizational Structure
0.725
There are strict rules on how to carry
out activities .370 .736
For any change to be made there must be a clear communication from the top
management
.484 .681
Employee specialization has facilitated delegation of duties
.655 .571
Specialization leads to original thinking and unique solutions in my organization
.573 .631
4.3.1 Human Resources
The summated scale in Table 4.12 shows that majority agreed [45% agreed; 19% strongly
agreed] UNHAS has the right human resources for strategy implementation. Table 4.12
further shows there are optimal staffing level [64% agreed; 9% strongly agreed]; all staff
42
members are well informed with the organizations vision and mission [40% agreed; 25%
strongly agreed]; staff have the right knowledge for strategy implementation [39% agreed;
18% strongly agreed] and that employees have the right skills in implementing strategic
activities [36% agreed; 23% strongly agreed].
Table 4.12: Human Resources Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
We have optimal staffing level 0 11 16 64 9 3.70
All staff members are well informed with the
organizations vision and mission
0 14 25 40 25 3.68
Staff have the right knowledge for strategy implementation
0 21 23 39 18 3.55
Employees have the right skills in implementing
strategic activities
0 14 27 36 23 3.68
Summated Scale 0 15 23 45 19 3.65
4.3.2 Financial Resources
The summated scale in Table 4.13 shows that majority agreed [44% agreed; 11% strongly
agreed] that financial resources for strategy implementation are available at UNHAS. The
organization sets a aside enough resources in its budget for strategy implementation [47%
agreed; 11% strongly agreed]; Sufficient time is allocated strategy implementation [46%
agreed; 14% strongly agreed]; the finance department releases funds at the right time [61%
agreed; 11% strongly agreed] and all strategic activities are sufficiently funded at all levels
of the organization [39% agreed; 11% strongly agreed].
On the other hand, majority were neutral as to whether there are funds for all activities
implemented [51% neutral]
Table 4.13: Financial Resources Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
My organization has set aside enough resources in its
budget for strategy implementation
0 9 32 47 11 3.61
Sufficient time is allocated strategy implementation 0 7 34 46 14 3.66
Funding for all activities implemented 0 15 51 27 5 3.21
Finance department releases funds at the right time 0 7 21 61 11 3.77
All strategic activities are sufficiently funded at all levels of the organization
2 16 31 39 11 3.41
Summated Scale 0 11 33 44 11 3.53
4.3.3 Information Systems
43
Table 4.14 indicates that there is favorable information system at UNHAS for strategy
implementation [56% agreed; 23% strongly agreed]. Majority agreed [52% agreed; 32%
strongly agreed] that there is ease of accessing work related information within the
organization when needed; that organizational information system is simple to use [57%
agreed; 18% strongly agreed]; the information system at UNHAS is secure [66% agreed;
16% strongly agreed]; and that staff normally get accurate information from my
organization’s information system [55% agreed; 25% strongly agreed].
Table 4.14: Information System Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
Ease of accessing work related information within the
organization when needed
2 5 9 52 32 4.07
Information system is simple to use 2 9 14 57 18 3.80
Information system is secure 2 7 9 66 16 3.86
I normally get accurate information from my
organization’s information system
0 9 11 55 25 3.95
Summated Scale 2 8 11 56 23 3.92
4.3.4 Organizational Structure
Table 4.15 indicates that there is favorable organizational structure at UNHAS for strategy
implementation [49% agreed; 20% strongly agreed]. Majority agreed [61% agreed; 18%
strongly agreed] that there are strict rules on how to carry out activities; that for any change
to be made there must be a clear communication from the top management [54% agreed;
30% strongly agreed]; that employee specialization has facilitated delegation of duties
[44% agreed; 14% strongly agreed]; that specialization leads to original thinking and
unique solutions in the organization [37% agreed; 19% strongly agreed].
44
Table 4.15: Organizational Structure Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
There are strict rules on how to carry out activities 0 2 19 61 18 3.95
For any change to be made there must be a clear
communication from the top management
0 5 11 54 30 4.09
Employee specialization has facilitated delegation of
duties
0 14 28 44 14 3.58
Specialization leads to original thinking and unique
solutions in my organization
0 19 26 37 19 3.56
Summated Scale 0 10 21 49 20 3.8
4.4.5 Correlation Matrix for Organizational Resources
The study then sought to identify whether there was a statistically significant relationship
between the variables and the dependent variable [Strategy implementation]. Bivariate
analysis was carried out to identify the relationships. Table 4.16 shows that (human
resources, financial resources, information systems and organizational structure) displayed
statistically significant positive correlation with strategy implementation. Human resources
had a moderate positive correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.535; p<0.01),
financial resources had a weak positive correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.301;
p<0.05), information system had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation (r=0.496; p<0.01), while organizational structure had a weak positive
correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.342; p<0.01).
Table 4.16 also shows that human resources, financial resources, information systems and
organizational structure significantly correlate with one another in the model.
45
Table 4.16: Correlation Matrix for the Organizational Structure Human
resources
Financial
resources
Informa
tion
systems
Organiza
tional
structure
Strategy
Implementati
on
Financial
resources
Pearson
Correlation
.559** 1
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000
N 43 43
Information
systems
Pearson
Correlation
.527** .546** 1
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .000
N 44 43 44
Organizational
structure
Pearson
Correlation
.545** .460** .394** 1
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .002 .009
N 43 42 43 43
Strategy
Implementation
Pearson
Correlation
.535** .301* .496** .342* 1
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .050 .001 .025
N 44 43 44 43 44
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
4.4.6 Multiple Regression Analysis for Organizational Resources
Table 4.17 shows that four independent variables in the model when considered
independently, explain only 37.2% of the success of strategy implementation as represented
by the R2. This therefore means the four contribute about 37.2% of the success of strategy
implementation.
46
Table 4.17: Coefficient of Determination (R2) for Organizational Resources
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .610a .372 .304 .577
a. Predictors: (Constant), Organizational structure, Information system, Financial resources, Human resources
The regression results in Table 4.18 shows that if all the other factors are zero, the influence
of organizational resources on strategy implementation will be 1.908. The table also shows
that a unit increase in effective human resources will lead to a 0.366 increase in success of
strategy implementation; a unit increase in financial resources will lead to a 0.135 increase
in success of strategy implementation; a unit increase in favourable information system will
lead to a 0.270 increase in success of strategy implementation while a unit increase in
effective organizational structure will lead to a 0.04 increase in success of strategy
implementation. This infers that human resources [0.366] contributed more to the success
of strategy implementation followed by effective information systems [0.270], financial
resources [0.135] and finally effective organizational structure [0.040].
Table 4.18: Multiple Regression Analysis for Organizational Resources
Model Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 1.908 .567 3.368 .002
Human resources .366 .150 .441 2.445 .019
Financial resources .135 .161 .144 .840 .406
Information system .270 .141 .318 1.919 .063
Organizational
structure
.040 .156 .041 .255 .801
4.5 Culture on Strategy Implementation
Table 4.19 indicates that Cronbach's alpha for the individual sub variables range from 0.686
to 0.888, which indicates a high level of internal consistency for the scale. Table 4.19 also
shows that the item-total correlation ranges from 0.373 to 0.819 and that removal of any
question would result in a lower Cronbach's alpha. Thus deleting any question weakens
the reliability of the construct. Therefore, all questions were considered for analysis.
47
Table 4.19: Cronbach’s Alpha Analysis for Culture Test Items
Scale
Culture and Strategy Implementation
Corrected Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if
Item Deleted
Cronbach’s Alpha
Culture on
Strategy
Implementation
Team work
0.888
There is trust among employees .677 .892
Diversity of opinion is respected .771 .851
Staff support each other to get work done
.788 .852
There is free and open sharing of ideas and resources
.819 .832
Culture of Stability
0.686
My organization places high value in rules
.452 .632
Several authorizations are required to
make any changes .383 .675
Levels of output are consistent .535 .587
Activity results can easily be predicted .523 .584
Risk taking culture
0.820
Employees are encouraged to proactively seek out opportunities
.487 .818
Staff to take calculated risks in solving work related problems
.553 .801
Innovation is highly encouraged .797 .723
There is room for making mistakes
when trying new ideas .583 .793
Employee ambition is positively encouraged
.651 .773
Result Oriented
0.846
Organizational long term goals are very
clear .717 .790
The long term organizational goals are translated into functional and individual
goals
.644 .824
There are clear results oriented
agreements between staff and the organization
.770 .767
There is periodic appraisals on progress .614 .834
48
4.3.1 Team Work
Table 4.20 indicates that there is team work at UNHAS [44% agreed; 21% strongly agreed].
Majority agreed [33% agreed; 23% strongly agreed] that there is trust among employees;
diverse opinions are respected [49% agreed; 19% strongly agreed]; staff support each other
to get work done [51% agreed; 19% strongly agreed]; and that there is free and open sharing
of ideas and resources [44% agreed; 21% strongly agreed].
Table 4.20: Team Work Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
There is trust among employees 2 14 28 33 23 3.60
Diversity of opinion is respected 2 12 19 49 19 3.70
Staff support each other to get work done 2 0 27 51 19 3.84
There is free and open sharing of ideas and resources 2 9 23 44 21 3.72
Summated Scale 2 9 24 44 21 3.72
4.3.2 Culture of Stability
Table 4.21 indicates that majority agreed that there is culture of stability at UNHAS [52%
agreed; 24% strongly agreed]. Majority agreed [51% agreed; 30% strongly agreed] that the
organization places high values in rules; that there are several authorizations are required
to make any changes [51% agreed; 37% strongly agreed]; that the levels of out puts are
consistent [61% agreed; 14% strongly agreed]; and that activity results can easily be
predicted [43% agreed; 14% strongly agreed].
Table 4.21: Culture of Stability Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
My organization places high value in rules 0 7 11 51 30 4.05
Several authorizations are required to make any changes 0 7 5 51 37 4.19
Levels of output are consistent 0 4 21 61 14 3.84
Activity results can easily be predicted 2 7 33 43 14 3.60
Summated Scale 1 6 18 52 24 3.92
4.3.3 Risk Taking Culture
Table 4.22 indicates that there is moderate risk taking culture at UNHAS [28% neutral;
38% agreed; 7% strongly agreed]. Majority agreed that there is some level of risk taking
culture in the organization. While 43% agreed that employees are encouraged to proactively
seek out opportunities; 37% agreed that innovation is highly encouraged; 35% agreed there
is room for making mistakes when trying new ideas; 33% agreed that employee ambition
is positively encouraged.
49
Table 4.22: Risk Taking Culture Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
Employees are encouraged to proactively seek out
opportunities
2 16 31 43 7 3.36
Staff to take calculated risks in solving work related
problems
5 21 26 43 5 3.21
Innovation is highly encouraged 0 29 20 37 15 3.37
There is room for making mistakes when trying new
ideas
2 24 35 35 2 3.12
Employee ambition is positively encouraged 7 23 28 33 7 3.10
Summated Scale 3 23 28 38 7 3.23
4.3.4 Results Oriented
The study also demonstrated that there is a culture of result oriented at UNHAS [47%
agreed; 29% strongly agreed]. Majority agreed [48% agreed; 25% strongly agreed] that the
organization has clear long term objectives.; that the long term goals of the organization
are translated into functional and individual goals [47% agreed; 25% strongly agreed]; that
there are clear results oriented agreements between staff and the organization [49% agreed;
21% strongly agreed]; and that there are periodic appraisals on progress [45% agreed; 43%
strongly agreed].
Table 4.23: Results Oriented
Variables Percentages [%] Mean
SDA DA N A SA
Organizational long term goals are very clear 0 5 21 48 25 3.95
The long term organizational goals are translated into
functional and individual goals
0 5 23 47 25 3.93
There are clear results oriented agreements between
staff and the organization
0 2 28 49 21 3.88
There is periodic appraisals on progress 0 0 12 45 43 4.30
Summated Scale 0 3 21 47 29 4.02
4.5.5 Correlation Matrix for the Effect of Culture
The study then sought to identify whether there was a statistically significant relationship
between the variables and the dependent variable [Strategy implementation]. Bivariate
analysis was carried out to identify the relationships. Table 4.24 shows that stability, risk
taking and results oriented cultures displayed statistically significant positive correlation
with strategy implementation. Stability culture had a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation (r=0.499; p<0.01), Risk taking culture had a weak positive
50
correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.359; p<0.05), while results oriented culture
a moderate positive correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.511; p>0.01). Further,
the variables of stability, risk taking and result oriented cultures significantly correlate with
one another in the model.
Table 4.24: Correlation Matrix for the Effect of Culture Team work Stability
culture
Risk taking
culture
Results oriented
culture
Culture of
Stability
Pearson
Correlation
.590** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 42 42 Risk taking
culture
Pearson
Correlation
.422** .533** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .006 .000
N 41 41 41
Results oriented
culture
Pearson
Correlation
.418** .494** .495** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .001 .002
N 40 39 38 40
Strategy
Implementation
Pearson
Correlation
.295 .499** .359* .511**
Sig. (2-tailed) .055 .001 .021 .001
N 43 42 41 40
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
4.3.6 Multiple Regression Analysis for the Effects of Culture
Table 4.25 shows that the three independent variables when considered independently,
explain only 37.9% of the success of strategy implementation as represented by the R2. This
therefore means the three contribute about 37.9% of the success of strategy implementation.
Table 4.25: Coefficient of Determination (R2) for the Effects of Culture
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .616a .379 .325 .579
a. Predictors: (Constant), Results oriented, Stability culture, Risk taking culture
The regression results in Table 4.26 shows that if all the other factors are zero, the influence
of culture on strategy implementation will be 1.219. The table also shows that a unit
increase in the culture of stability will lead to a 0.321 increase in success of strategy
implementation; a unit increase in the culture of risk taking will lead to a 0.063 increase in
success of strategy implementation while a unit increase in the culture of results oriented
51
will lead to a 0.321 increase in success of strategy implementation. This infers that the
culture of results oriented and stability contributed more to the success of strategy
implementation followed by the culture of risk taking.
Table 4.26: Multiple Regression Analysis for the Effects of Culture
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 1.219 .590 2.067 .046
Stability culture .321 .159 .333 2.023 .051
Risk taking culture .063 .157 .066 .403 .690
Results oriented
culture
.321 .159 .333 2.023 .051
4.6 Chapter Summary
The chapter presented the findings of the study. It was organized in such a manner that the
first section presented findings on the demographics. The second part was on the first
research question, the role of leadership. Part three presented results on the role of
organizational resources while part four was on the role of culture on strategy
implementation. Chapter five covers the study summary, discussions, conclusions and
recommendations of the study.
52
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
The purpose of this study was to identify the determinants of strategy implementation at
United Nations Humanitarian Air services Somalia. Chapter five gives the study summary,
discussions of the results and recommendations drawn from the study.
5.2 Summary
The study was guided by the following research questions. Does Leadership affect strategy
implementation? How do organizational resources impact strategy implementation? Is
there a relationship between culture and strategy implementation? The study adopted a
descriptive research design. In this study the total population comprised the 200 World
Food Programme employees based in Nairobi and Somalia. A stratified random sampling
was used to draw 30% of the 200 employees which translates into 60 employees to form
the sample size. Primary data was collected using a questionnaire. The data analysis
involved descriptive statistics [frequencies, percentages, means] while inferential statistics
involved correlations and regression analysis to infer the findings to the entire population.
The findings were presented in form of tables and figures.
The first research question sought to identify the effects of leadership on strategy
implementation. The regression analysis identified coming up with vision [0.442] as the
major role of leadership in strategy implementation followed by employee motivation
[0.120] and effective communication [0.015]. The relationship between vision, motivation
and communication displayed statistically significant positive correlation with strategy
implementation. Vision had a moderate positive correlation with strategy implementation
(r=0.664; p<0.01), Communication had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation (r=0.508; p<0.01), while adaptability to change did not have statistically
significant relationship with strategy implementation (r=0.179; p>0.01). Further, the
variables of vision, motivation and communication significantly correlate with one another
in the model.
The second research question sought to identify the role of organizational resources in
strategy implementation. Human resources, financial resources, information systems and
organizational structure were subjected to regression analysis with strategy
53
implementation. The study showed that human resources, financial resources, information
systems and organizational structure displayed statistically significant positive correlation
with strategy implementation. Human resources had a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation (r=0.535; p<0.01), financial resources had a weak positive
correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.301; p<0.05), information system had a
moderate positive correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.496; p<0.01), while
organizational structure had a weak positive correlation with strategy implementation
(r=0.342; p<0.01). Human resources, financial resources, information systems and
organizational structure significantly correlate with one another in the model. Regression
analysis showed that human resources [0.366] contributed more to the success of strategy
implementation followed by effective information systems [0.270], financial resources
[0.135] and finally effective organizational structure [0.040].
The third research question sought to identify the effects of organizational culture on
strategy implementation. The study showed that culture of stability, culture of risk taking
and culture of results oriented displayed statistically significant positive correlation with
strategy implementation. Stability culture had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation (r=0.499; p<0.01), Risk taking culture had a weak positive correlation with
strategy implementation (r=0.359; p<0.05), while results oriented culture had a moderate
positive correlation with strategy implementation (r=0.511; p>0.01). Further, the variables
of stability, risk taking and result oriented cultures significantly correlate with one another
in the model. The study showed that the culture of results oriented [0.321] and stability
[0.321] contributed more to the success of strategy implementation followed by the culture
of risk taking [0.063].
5.3 Discussions
5.3.1 Effects of Leadership on Strategy Implementation
The first research question sought to identify the effects of leadership on strategy
implementation. The regression analysis identified coming up with vision as the major role
of leadership in strategy implementation. Vision had a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation. This was manifested by the fact that at UNHAS, leaders have a
clear picture of the organization’s future; leaders are optimistic of the organization’s future;
and that top management are consumed with making tomorrow a better day. The findings
are in line with Karami (2007) arguments that successful strategy implementation relies on
54
the managerial ability to be visionary, lead employees and assist redesign new products. It
further supports sentiments by Mintzberg et al. (2009) that to choose a direction, a leader
must first have developed a mental image of a possible and a desirable future state of the
organization. This defines the vision which is a target that beckons, a condition that does
not presently exist and never existed before.
The second role of leadership in strategy implementation was employee motivation.
Motivation had a moderate positive correlation with strategy implementation. This is
because at UNHAS, management are focused in unique strengths of each employee; and
that leaders set clear goals for each employee. This supports assertions by Kinicki and
Kreitner (2007) that it is the responsibility of leadership to motivate and inspire the people
in the organization to work jointly so that the organization’s vision can be translated into
reality. The finding is also in line with Mazzola and Kellermanns (2010) who indicated
that strategy implementation requires galvanizing the organisation employees and
managers at all levels to turn the formulated strategies into action. An excellent strategy
that is poorly executed will yield the same poor result as a bad strategy. Pearce and
Robinson (2007) also argues that leadership should strive to create a climate of
organizational trust. Hrebiniak (2008) further notes that a high degree of trust is essential
in strategy implementation because trust acts as an emotional glue that unites leaders and
motivates followers in a common purpose and helps to achieve the outcomes of an
organization strategy.
The third role of leadership in strategy implementation was effective communication which
had a moderate statistically significant positive correlation with strategy implementation.
This was manifested by the fact that leaders speak with security and confidence;
management team are brilliant and informative; management takes time to listen to other
employees opinions; and that top management are always passionate of the organization’s
mission and vision. This is in line with Alexander (2003) who indicated that communication
is one of the most regularly mentioned factors, which is at the background of the successful
implementation of a strategy. He suggests that communication plays a key role towards the
realization of organization strategic objectives. It further supports arguments by Riel and
Fombrun (2007) that communication consumes at least 75 percent of each day’s work at
all organizational levels and the effectiveness of corporate communication is not only to
pass a message but its ability to draw internal support from employees for the company’s
55
strategic objectives. Thus, poor or ineffective communication from top-down, bottom-up,
across functions and division has negative effects on strategy implementation.
5.3.2 Effects of Organizational Resources on Strategy Implementation
The second research question sought to identify the role of organizational resources in
strategy implementation. Human resources were identified to be the major contributor to
the success of strategy implementation. It had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation. The study showed that UNHAS has the right human resources for strategy
implementation. It showed that there are optimal staffing; all staff members are well
informed with the organizations vision and mission; staff have the right knowledge for
strategy implementation and that employees have the right skills in implementing strategic
activities. These findings are in line with Raps (2005) who indicated that strategy
implementation is best accomplished through high performing people and one of the major
reasons why strategy implementation fails is because the human factor is conspicuously
absent right from strategic planning. Hence, it is desirable to create a fit between the
intended strategy and the specific personality profile of the implementation key players in
different organization departments. Further this endorses sentiments by Mintzberg et al.
(2009) that organizations with competent employees are more likely to be succesful in
strategy implementation when compared to those organisations with employees that lack
strategy lack skills. In this case, competencies are the glue that binds existing operations
and also the engine for new business development.
The second organizational resource that positively contributes to the success of strategy
implementation was information systems which had a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation. The study showed that staff can easily access work related
information within the organization when needed; organizational information system is
simple to use; the information system at UNHAS is secure and that staff normally get
accurate information from the organization’s information system. This is supported by
Reddy et al. (2009) who posited that an effective information system provides the means
of effective and efficient coordination between departments; quick and reliable referencing;
access to relevant data and documents; use of less labour; improvement in organizational
and departmental techniques; management of day-to-day activities (as accounts, stock
control, payroll, etc.); day-to-day assistance in a department and closer contact with the rest
of the world. Ali et al. (2013) explain that good information system planning enables
56
organizations to closely align the IS and strategic business objectives. Such alignment
ultimately ensures organizations gain in the implementation of its strategies.
The third resource that positively contributes to the success of strategy implementation was
financial resources which had a weak positive correlation with strategy implementation.
The study showed that financial resources for strategy implementation are available at
UNHAS. The organization sets aside enough resources in its budget for strategy
implementation; sufficient time is allocated for strategy implementation; the finance
department releases funds at the right time and all strategic activities are sufficiently funded
at all levels of the organization. The findings support arguments that financial resources
have a critical importance in strategy implementation and the desired strategy must be
rooted in what is financially feasible in the organization (Homburg et al., 2004). The basic
assumption is that all strategy implementation activities attract some expenditure.
Therefore for these activities to be carried out successfully, financial allocation plays a
critical role.
The fourth resource that positively contributes to the success of strategy implementation
was organizational structure which had a weaker positive correlation with strategy
implementation. Majority agreed that there are strict rules on how to carry out activities;
for any change to be made there must be a clear communication from the top management;
that employee specialization has facilitated delegation of duties; that specialization leads to
original thinking and unique solutions in the organization. The findings indicate that there
are elements of formalization, specialization and decentralization structure at UNHAS.
Pearce and Robinson (2007) argue that a highly centralised structure is very demanding on
the owner. On the other hand, a functional organisation structure delegates and
differentiates the day to day operating decisions. In this way, the divisional structures
liberates the chief executive officer for broader strategic decisions though it creates room
for potential inconsistency among divisions. This therefore calls for a matrix structure
which maximizes efficient use of funtional managers as well as giving the middle level
managers broader exposure to strategic issues.
5.3.3 Effects of Organizational Culture on Strategy Implementation
The third research question sought to identify the effect of organizational culture on
strategy implementation. The study showed that culture of stability had a moderate positive
57
correlation with strategy implementation. The study showed that at UNHAS, the
organization places high values in rules; there are several authorizations required to make
any changes; that the levels of out puts are consistent; and activity results can easily be
predicted. This shows a more stable working environment. It shows that process at UNHAS
are fairly standardized and it does not necessarily mean that the organization prefer stability
and resistant to change as alluded by Lunenburg (2010). The use of standard procedures
act as a strategy for creating suitable functional interventions to achieving the
organizational strategic intent (Mutihac 2010).
Secondly, the results oriented culture showed a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation. The study showed that at UNHAS, there are clear long term objectives.;
the long term goals of the organization are translated into functional and individual goals;
that there are clear results oriented agreements between staff and the organization; and that
there are periodic appraisals on progress. This supports findings by Vähämäki, et al. (2011)
that indicated that results oriented management provides the management framework with
tools for strategic planning, risk management, performance monitoring and evaluation. The
the primary purpose of which is to to improve efficiency and effectiveness through
organisational learning, and secondly to fulfil accountability obligations through
performance reporting. This is also in line with Al-alak and Tarabieh (2011) attestation that
due to rapid changes facing organizations, results orientation requires a clear understanding
of both the present and future dynamic conditions within and outside the organization. This
understanding enables the decision makers to align the situation to the intended results. In
strategy implementation, this means that as the situation changes during the implementation
process, a result oriented organizational culture will keep the strategy implementers on the
original goals and also offers the edge to adjust to change while still focusing on the
intended outcome.
Third, the culture of risk taking culture had a weak positive correlation with strategy
implementation. At UNHAS, there is some level of risk taking culture in the organization.
Employees are encouraged to proactively seek out opportunities; innovation is encouraged;
there is room for making mistakes when trying new ideas; and that employee ambition is
positively encouraged. The significance of risk taking on strategy implementation is
supported by Roomi and Harrison (2010) who indicated that since strategy implementation
comes with a certain degree of uncertainty coupled with ambiguous environment, this
58
exercise inevitably carries risk elements and when leaders have higher risk-taking behavior,
pro-activeness and innovativeness, they can stimulate their teams to be more creative
during the strategy implementation and product development process. They argue that
raising these behaviors in the leader will tend to be accompanied by elevated creativity in
teams.
5.4 Conclusions
5.4.1 Effects of Leadership on Strategy Implementation
The first research question sought to identify the effects of leadership on strategy
implementation. The regression analysis identified coming up with vision as the major role
of leadership in strategy implementation. Vision had a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation. This was manifested by the fact that at UNHAS, leaders have a
clear picture of the organization’s future; leaders are optimistic of the organization’s future;
and that top management are consumed with making tomorrow a better day. The second
role of leadership in strategy implementation was employee motivation. Motivation had a
moderate positive correlation with strategy implementation. This is because at UNHAS,
management are focused in unique strengths of each employee; and that leaders set clear
goals for each employee.
The third role of leadership in strategy implementation was effective communication which
had a moderate statistically significant positive correlation with strategy implementation.
This was manifested by the fact that leaders speak with security and confidence;
management team are brilliant and informative; management takes time to listen to other
employees opinions; and that top management are always passionate of the organization’s
mission and vision.
5.4.2 Effects of Organizational Resources on Strategy Implementation
The second research question sought to identify the role of organizational resources in
strategy implementation. Human resources were identified to be the major contributor to
the success of strategy implementation. It had a moderate positive correlation with strategy
implementation. The study showed that UNHAS has the right human resources for strategy
implementation. It showed that there are optimal staffing; all staff members are well
informed with the organizations vision and mission; staff have the right knowledge for
59
strategy implementation and that employees have the right skills in implementing strategic
activities.
The second organizational resource that positively contributes to the success of strategy
implementation was information systems which had a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation. The study showed that there is ease of accessing work related
information within the organization when needed; organizational information system is
simple to use; the information system at UNHAS is secure and that staff normally get
accurate information from the organization’s information system.
The third resource that positively contributes to the success of strategy implementation was
financial resources which had a weak positive correlation with strategy implementation.
The study showed that financial resources for strategy implementation are available at
UNHAS.The organization sets aside enough resources in its budget for strategy
implementation; sufficient time is allocated for strategy implementation; the finance
department releases funds at the right time and all strategic activities are sufficiently funded
at all levels of the organization.
The fourth resource that positively contributes to the success of strategy implementation
was organizational structure which had even a weaker positive correlation with strategy
implementation. Majority agreed that there are strict rules on how to carry out activities;
that for any change to be made there must be a clear communication from the top
management; that employee specialization has facilitated delegation of duties; that there is
specialization leads to original thinking and unique solutions in the organization.
5.4.3 Effects of Organizational Culture on Strategy Implementation
The third research question sought to identify the effect of organizational culture on
strategy implementation. The study showed that culture of stability showed a moderate
positive correlation with strategy implementation. At UNHAS, the organization places high
values in rules; there are several authorizations are required to make any changes; that the
levels of out puts are consistent; and activity results can easily be predicted.
Secondly, the culture of results oriented culture a moderate positive correlation with
strategy implementation. The study showed that at UNHAS, there are clear long term
objectives.; the long term goals of the organization are translated into functional and
60
individual goals; that there are clear results oriented agreements between staff and the
organization; and that there are periodic appraisals on progress.
Third, risk taking culture had a weak positive correlation with strategy implementation. At
UNHAS, there is some level of risk taking culture in the organization. Employees are
encouraged to proactively seek out opportunities; innovation is encouraged; there is room
for making mistakes when trying new ideas; and that employee ambition is positively
encouraged.
5.5 Recommendations
5.5.1 Recommendations for Improvement
5.5.1.1 Effects of Leadership on Strategy Implementation
The study has identified setting of the organizational vision, employee motivation and
effective communication as some of the leadership roles during strategy implementation.
Despite this, the correlation of the variable to strategy implementation is only moderate.
This means that the organization has not fully exploited the potential of these variables in
improving the success of the strategies being implemented. The organization should
therefore put measures to ensure the potential of the variables are fully exploited.
5.5.1.2 Effects of Organizational Resources on Strategy Implementation
The study has identified human resources as the main contributor to the success of strategy
implementation. It is therefore imperative for the organization to establish a continuous
human resource development to be able to anticipate and deal with the emerging issues in
strategy implementation.
5.5.1.3 Effects of Organizational Culture on Strategy Implementation
The study demonstrated that the organization is fairly stable in its operations. Despite the
fact that standardization may be beneficial to the implementation of strategies in the short
run, this may not be the case in the long run as the environmental conditions are
continuously turbulent. The organization needs to be more flexible in its approach of
management to promote innovativeness to effectively respond to the emerging issues in
strategy implementation.
5.5.2 Recommendations for Further Studies
61
The study was a case study. Therefore, studies in other related organizations would help
develop a stronger empirical evidence of the effect of leadership, organizational resources
and culture on strategy implementation.
62
REFERENCES
Accountemps. (2010). Accountemps survey: CFOs concerned about time waste but also
see business benefits in social media use. Lahore: HT Media Ltd.
Acquaah, M. (2008). Managerial social capital, strategic orientation, and organizational.
Strategic Management Journal, 28 (12), 1235-1255.
Aguenza, B., Al-Kassem, A., & Mat Som, A. (2012). Social Media and Productivity in
the Workplace: Challenges and Constraints. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research
in Business, 2 (2), 22-26.
Ahmadi, S. A., Salamzadeh, Y., Daraei, M., & Akbari, J. (2012). Relationship between
Organizational Culture and Strategy Implementation: Typologies and Dimensions.
Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal, 4 ( 3 &
4), 286-299.
Al-alak, B. A., & Tarabieh, S. A. (2011). Gaining Competitive Advantage and
Organizational Performance Through Customer Orientation, Innovation
Differentiation and Market Differentiation. International Journal of Economics
and Management Sciences, 1 (5), 80-91.
Alexander, L. (2003). Succesfully Implementing Strategic Decisions. Long Range Vol 18
, 91-97.
Ali, R. H., Mohamad, R., & Tretiakov, A. (2013). The Determinants of Strategic
Information System Planning (SISP) Success: A Proposed Framework for Small
and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Journal of Innovation Management in
Small & Medium Enterprises , 1-9.
Al-Mamary, Y. H., Shamsuddin, A., & Aziati, N. (2013). The Impact of Management
Information Systems Adoption in Managerial Decision Making:A Review.
Management Information Systems, 8 (4), 10-17.
Almeida, F. (2012). Web 2.0 technologies and social networking security fears in
enterprises. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and
Applications, 3 (2), 152-156.
Arasa, R., & K'Obonyo, P. (2012). The Relationship between Strategic Planning and Firm
Performance. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2 (22),
201-213.
AT&T. (2008, 10 11). The Business Impacts of Social Networking. A White Paper in
Cooperation with Early Strategies Consulting .
63
Atia Naznin, S. (2011). Protecting intellectual property rights in Bangladesh: an
overview. Bangladesh reserach publication journal, 6 (1), 12-21.
Azeem, S. (2010). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment among employees in
the Sultanate of Oman. Psychology , 295-299.
Azhar, A., Ikram, S., Rashid, S., & Saqib, S. (2012, Vol 1, Issue 2). The Role of
Leadership in Strategy Formulation and Implemetation. International Journal of
management and Organizational Studies , 32-38.
BAT. (2014). Our history – a timeline. Retrieved September 09, 2014, from British
America Tobacco: www.bat.com
Beato, F., Kohlweiss, M., & Wouters, K. (2011). Enforcing access control in social
network sites. Hot Topics in Privacy Enhancing Technologies (HotPETS) .
Beckerman-Rodau, A. (2011). Ideas and the public dormain:revisiting ins. AP in the
internet age. Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law, 1 (1), 1-33.
Bennett, J., Owers, M., Pitt, M., & Tucker, M. (2010). Workplace impact of social
Networking. Property Management, 28 (3), 138-148.
Benzie, R. (2007, May 3). Facebook banned for Ontario staffers. The Star.
Berna-Martinez, J., & Macia-Perez, F. (2012). Overcoming resistance to change in
business innovation processes. International Journal of Engineering and
Technology, 4 (3), 148-161.
Beshay, M., & Sixsmith, A. (2008). Dimensions of Culture: A Project Perspective.
Communications of the IBIMA , 82-88.
Bonache, J. (n.d.). Job satisfaction among expatriates, reptriates and domestic employee.
Boyd, D. A., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: definition, history, and
scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13 (1), 210-230.
Bozeman, B., & Straussman, J. D. (1990). Public management strategies: Guidelines for
managerial effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bughin, J., Corb, L., Manyika, J., Nottebohm, O., Chui, M., Barbat, B., et al. (2011). The
impact of Internet technologies: Search. New York: McKinsey & Company.
Burton, P., Wu, Y., & Prybutok, V. (2010). Social Network Position and Its Relationship
to Performance of IT Professionals. Informing Science: the International Journal
of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 13.
Butow, R., & Taylor, K. (2008). How to succeed in business using LinkedIn: Making
connections and capturing opportunities. Amacom: New York.
64
Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2004). Making Sense of Change Management: A Complete
Guide to the Models, Tools and Techniques of Organisational Change. London,
Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Diagnosing and Chang ing Organizational
Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework. Boston: Addison-Wesley
Publishing.
Carminati, B., Ferrari, E., Heatherly, R., Kantarcioglub, M., & Thuraisingham, B. (2010).
Semantic web-based social network access control. Computer and Security, 30, 108-115.
Cater, T., & Pucko, D. (2010). Factors of effective startegy Implementation:Emperical
Study from Slovenia business practices. Journal for East European Management
Studies, , Vol. 15, No. 3 (2010), pp. 207-236.
Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and Structure. Cambrridge, MA: Mit Press.
Chi, M. (2011). Security policy and social media use. SANS Institute Reading Room .
Chitale, N. (2013). Agent Banking Operations as a Competitive Strategy of Commercial
Banks in Kisumu City. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4
(13), 306-324.
Cooper, C., & Schindle, P. (2008). Business research methods (10 ed.). Boston: McGraw-
Hill.
Cooper, D., & Schindler, P. (2003). Business Research Methods. New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
Cornelius, D. (2009). Online social networking: is it a productivity bust or boon for law
firms? Law Practice Magazine, 35 (2), 28.
Dawson, P. (2003). Understanding organizational change: the contemporary experiences
of people at work. London: Sage Publications.
De Choudhury, M., & Counts, S. (2013). Understanding affect in the workplace via social
media. Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative
work (pp. 303-316). New York: ACM.
Deresky.H. (2008). Managing Across Borders and Cultures. London, UK: Pearson
Education Ltd.
Duke, D. L. (2011). The challenges of school district leadership. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Edosomwan, S., Prakasan, S. K., Kouame, D., Watson, J., & Seymour, T. (2011). The
history of social media and its impact on business. Journal of Applied
Management and Entrepreneurship, 16 (3), 79-91.
65
Emory, C., & Cooper, D. R. (1991). Business Research Methods (4th ed.). Boston: Irwin.
Evans, D., & McKee, J. (2010). Social Media Marketing: The Next Generation of
Business Engagement. Indiana: Wiley Publishing, Inc.
Farooq, M., & Khan, M. (2011). Impact of training and feedback on employee
performance. Far East Journal of Psychology and Business, 5 (1), 23-33.
Ferreira, A., & du Plessis, T. (2009). Effect of online social networking on employee
productivity. Peer Reviewed Article, 11 (1), 1-16.
Ferreira, A., & Du Plessis, T. (2009). Effect of online social networking on employee
productivity. Peer Reviewed Article, 11 (1), 1-16.
Flap, H., & Völker, B. (2001). Goal specific social capital and job satisfaction effects of
different types of networks on instrumental and social aspects of work. Social
Networks, 23, 297-320.
Forman, J., & Argenti, P. (2005). How Corporate Communication Infunces Strategy
Implementation,Reputation and Corporate Brand. Corporate Reputation Review,
Vol 8 , 245-264.
Fry, F. L., Stoner, C. R., & Hattwick, R. E. (2004). Business: An integrative approach
(3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Fullan, M. (2011). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gaines, C., Hoover, D., Foxx, W., Matuszek, T., & Morrison, R. (2012). Information
systems as a strategic partner in organizational performance. Journal of
Management and Marketing Research , 1-17.
Garson, D. (2012). Sampling. Raleigh, NC: Statistical Associates Publishing.
Gopinath.A. (2013). Corporate Governance and Development. London, UK: Edward
Elgar.
Hall, B. H., & Khan, B. (2002). Adoption of new technology. New Economy Handbook .
Hanson, K. &. (2012). Rethinking development cahallenges for public policy. London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Harrington, R. J. (2004). Implications for the Strategic Process of Food Service Firms.
International Journal of Hospitality , 317-341.
Harrison, J. (2012). Foundations in strategic management. New York: Cengage Learning.
Heide, M., Gronhaug, K., & Johannssen, S. (2002). Exploring Barriers to the Successful
Implementation of a Formulated Strategy. Scandinavian Journal of Management
Vol 18 , 217-231.
66
Henry, A. (2008). Understanding Strategic Management . Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Homburg, C., Krohmer, H., & Workman, J. (2004). A Strategy Implementation
Perspective of Market Orientation. Journal of Business Research , 57, 1331-1340.
Hrebiniak, L. (2008). Making strategy work: Overcoming the obstacles to effective
execution. Ivey Business Journal Online, , 72, 2, 1.
Hunger, J., & Wheelen, T. (2007). Essentials of Strategy Management. New Jersey, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Hyrsky, K., & Tuunanen, M. (1999). Innovativeness and Risk-taking Propensity: A
Cross-Cultural Study of Finnish and U.S. Entrepreneurs and Small Business
Owners. Retrieved May 12, 2015, from
http://lta.hse.fi/1999/3/lta_1999_03_a2.pdf.
Issa-Salwe, A., Ahmed, M., Aloufi, K., & Kabir, M. (2010). Strategic Information
Systems Alignment: Alignment of IS/IT with Business Strategy. Journal of
Information Processing Systems, 6 (1), 121-128.
Jagongo, A., & Kinyua, C. (2013). The Social Media and Entrepreneurship Growth: A
New Business Communication Paradigm among SMEs in Nairobi. International
Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3 (10), 213-227.
Jaspers, S., & Maxwell. (2008). targeting in complex emergencies:Somalia Country Case
Study. MA: Feinstein International Center.
Jett, Q. R., & George, J. (2003). Work interrupted: A closer look at the role of
interruptions in organizational life. Academy of Management Review, 28 (3), 494-
507.
Kachru, U. (2005). Strategic Management:Concepts and Cases. Delhi: Excel Books
India.
Kalali, N. S., Akhavan, M. A., & Pourezzat, D. (2011). Why does strategic plans? African
Journal of Business Management , 523: 9831-9837.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. (2011). The Strategy Focused Organization – How Balanced
Scorecard Companies. Boston,MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Karami, A. (2007). Strategy Formulation in Entrepreneurial Firms. Hampshire, UK:
Ashgate Publisher Limited.
Karimi, Y., & Kadir, S. L. (2012). The Impact of Organisational Culture on the
Implementation of TQM: Empirical Study in the Iranian Oil Company. American
Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 2, 205-216.
67
Kim. (2012). Online social media networking and assessing its security risks.
International Journal of Security and Its Applications, 6 (3), 11-18.
Kimiti, K. G., Okello, B., & Karanja, G. W. (2014). Effects of Structure Specialization on
Strategic Plan Implementation in Public Secondary Schools in Bahati Sub County,
Kenya. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 2 (11),
1-19.
Kleysen, R. F., & Street, C. T. (2001). Toward a multi-dimensional measure of individual
innovative behavior. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2 (3), 284 - 296.
Kothari, C. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi: Age
International Limited Publishers.
kreitner.R. (2004). Management. Boston:MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Lawson, A. (2014). Investing in Leaders and Leadership to Secure a Desirable Future.
Quest, 66:3 , 263-287.
Lee, S.-Y. (2009). Impacts of Organizational Resources on Agency
Performance:Evidence from Federal Agencies. Retrieved May 15, 2015, from
http://www.pmranet.org/conferences/osu2009/papers/Lee.
Leftheriotis, I., & Giannakos, M. (2014). Using social media for work: Losing your time
or improving your work? Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 134-142.
Li, C. (2010). Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform the Way You
Lead. Jossey-Bass.
Li, Y., Guohui, S., & Eppler, M. J. (2008). Making Strategy Work: A Literature Review
on the Factors influencing Strategy Implementation. ICA Working Paper 2/2008 ,
1-46.
Loop, J. L., & Malyshev, A. (2013). How to Manage a company’s social media presence.
Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal .
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Forces for and Resistance to Organizational Change. National
Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 27 (4), 1-10.
Lussier, R., & Achua, C. (2009). Effective Leadership. New York, NY: Thomson South
Western.
Maddison.R, & Darnton, G. (1996). Information systems in organisations. London:UK:
Clays Ltd.
Makgosa, R. (2012). Rebranding an institution of higher education in Botswana. Business
and Economic Research, 2 (2), 1-13.
68
Martinez.l, & Martinez.G. (2013). the influence of organizationa structure on
oganizational learning. Intrernational Journal of Manpower , 537-566;Vol.32.
Mbaka, R. M., & Mugambi, F. (2014). Factors affecting successful strategy
implementation in the Water Sector in Kenya. Journal of Business and
Management, 16 (7(III) ), 61-68.
McKensey & Company. (2012). The social economy:unlocking value and productivity
through social technologies. New York: McKensey & Company.
Meri, K., & Miia, A. (2011). Determining the organizational social media adoption and
use. ECIS 2011 Proceedings, (p. Paper 248).
Messah, O. B., & Mucai, P. G. (2011). Factors Affecting the Implementation of Strategic
Plans in Government Tertiary Institutions: A Survey of Selected Technical
Training Institutes. European Journal of Business and Management, 3 (3), 86-
105.
Michlitsch, F. (2000). High Performing, Loyal Employees: the real way to implement a
strategy Vol. 28 Iss 6. Emerald Insight , 28-33.
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (2009). Strategy Safari. London, UK: Pearson
Education Limited.
Mokoya, S., & Njuguna, E. (2012). Adoption and use of information communication
technology small and medium enterprises in Thika Town, Kenya. International
Journal of Business and Social Science, 3 (13), 498-504.
Moqbel, M. (2012). The effect of the use of social networking sites in the workplace on
job performance. PhD. Dessertation, Texas A&M International University .
Mugenda, O., & Mugenda, A. (2003). Research methods. Quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Nairobi: Acts Press.
Mullins, J. (2010). Management and Organisational Behaviour. Financial Times Prentice
Hall.
Munene, A. G., & Nyaribo, Y. M. (2013). Effect of Social Media Pertication in the
Workplace on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Advances in
Management and Economics, 2 (2), 141-150.
Murphy, H. (2013). Social media use among employee: Influences of organizational
climate job involvement and organizational commitment. All Theses , Paper 1625.
Mutihac, R. (2010). Managing resistance and the use of internal communication in
organizations undergoing change: Case study of OMV Petrom. Master of Arts in
69
Corporate Communication THesis, Department of Language and Business
Communication. Aarhus School of Business .
Nah, S., & Saxton, G. D. (2013). Modeling the adoption and use of social media by
nonprofit organizations. New Media & Society, forthcoming, 12, 294-313.
Nucleus. (2009). Facebook: Measuring the cost to business of social notworking. Boston,
MA: Nucleus Research, Inc.
Okiro, K., & Ndungu, J. (2013). The Impact of Mobile and Internet Banking on
Performance of Financial Institutions in Kenya. European Scientific Journal, 9
(13), 1857-7431.
Olalekan, A., Remi, O., & Eniola, E. (2013). Impact of Online Social Networking on
Employees’ Commitment to Duties in Selected Organizations in Lagos State,
Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Economic Development, 1 (1), 94-
100.
Olsona, E. M., Slater, S. F., & Hult, G. T. (2005). The importance of structure and
process to strategy implementation. Business Horizons, 48, 47—54.
Peacok, L. (2008). Employers watch facebook usage. Employers’ Law .
Pearce, J., & Robinson, R. (2007). Strategic Management Formulation, Implementation
and Control. NewYork, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Pearson II, J., & Robinson, R. (2009). Strategic management: formulation,
implementation and control (11th ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Pella, A., Sumarwan, U., & Daryanto, A. (2013). Factors Affecting Poor Strategy
Implementation. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business , Vol. 15, No. 2
(May - August 2013): 183 - 204.
Pella, D., Sumarwan, U., & Daryanto, A. (2013). Factors Affecting Poor Strategy
Implementation. International Journal of Business , 183-204.
Pfeffer, J., & Oreily, C. (2010). Hidden Value: How Great Companies Achieve
Extraordinary Results with Ordinary People. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press.
Phatak, V., Bhagat, S., & Kashlak, .. (2005). Managing in a Diverse and Dynamic Global
Environment. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Ployhart, R. E. (2012). Social media in the workplace:issues and strategic questions.
Retrieved September 25, 2014, from
http://www.shrm.org/about/foundation/products/documents/social%20media%20b
riefing-%20final.pdf.
70
Prewitt, J. E., Weil, R., & McClure, A. Q. (2012). A Complex Adaptive Systems
Approach to Strategic Planning. Asian Journal of Business and Management
Sciences, 1 (11), 94-99.
Protiviti Consulting Group. (2014). Establishing and Nurturing Effective Risk Culture.
Retrieved May 17, 2015, from www.protiviti.com/.../Risk.../CRO-Series4-
Establishing-and-Nurturing
Rainey, H. G., & Steinbauer, P. (1999). Galloping elephants: Developing elements of a
theory of effective government organizations. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 9 (1), 1-32.
Rajasekar, J. (2014). Factors affecting Effective Strategy Implementation in a Service
Industry: A Study of Electricity Distribution Companies in the Sultanate of Oman.
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 5 (9(1)), 169-183.
Raps, A. (2005). Strategy Implementation, An Insurmountable Obstacle? . Hand book of
Business Strategy , 6(1),141-146.
Ray, M. (2008). Social networking: making connections on the web. Retrieved September
15, 2014, from Britannica Book of the Year, 2008, Encyclopedia Britannica
Online: http://search.eb.com/eb/article=9439169
Reddy, G., Srinivasu, R., Rikkula, S. R., & Rao, V. (2009). Management Information
System to Help Managers for Providing Decision Making in an Organization.
International Journal of Reviews in Computing , 1-6.
Richardson, K., & Hessey, S. (2009). Archiving the self? Facebook as biography and
relational memory. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society,
7 (1), 25-38.
Riel, B., & Fombrun, C. (2007). Essential of Corporate Communication. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Rooksby, J., Baxter, G., Cliff, D., Greenwood, D., Harvey, N., Kahn, A., et al. (2009).
Social networking and the workplace. The UK Large Scale Complex IT Systems
Initiative: St Andrews, UK.
Roomi, M. A., & Harrison, P. (2010). Entrepreneurial Leadership : What Is It and How
Should It Be Taught? International Review of Entrepreneurship, 9 (3), 1-44.
Rugman, M., Collinson, S., & Hodgetts, M. (2006). Intrenational Business. London,UK:
Prentice Hall.
Russo, M., & Fouts, P. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental
performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40 (3), 534-559.
71
Salmela, H., & Spil, T. (2013). Dynamic and Emergent Information Systems Strategic
formulation and Implementation. International Journal of Information
Management , 441-460 vol 22.
Schein, E. (2009). The corporate Culture: Survival Guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass Publisher.
Schyns, B., & Croon, M. (2006). A model of task demands, social structure, and leader-
member exchange and their relationship to job satisfaction. International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 17 (4), 602-615.
Senge, P., Art, K., Charlotte, R., Richard, R., George, R., & Bryan, S. (1999). The Dance
of change. The challenges of sustaining momemntum in learning organizations.
London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Seth, G. (2012). Analyzing the Effects of Social Media on the Hospitality Industry. UNLV
Theses/Dissertations/Professional Papers/Capstones , Paper 1346.
Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody : the power of organizing without
organizations. New York: Penguin Press.
Shullish, R. (2012). Risk assessment of social media. SANS Institute Reading Room , 2-
44.
Sparrowe, R. T. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals in groups.
Academy of Management Journal, 44 (2), 316-325.
Spector, B. (2011). Implementing organizational change: Theory into practice
(International ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Speculand, R. (2009). Six necessary mind shifts for implementing strategy. Business
Strategy series , pp. 161-172.
Stormbroek-Burgers, R. G., Sluis, L. E., & Montfort, K. v. (2011). Social Networks:
Effects on Identification, Performance and Satisfaction. Nyenrode Research ,
Paper no. 11-06.
Sudhakar, C., & Raju, S. (2014). The impact of training on employee productivity and
Job satisfaction: a study of financial advisors. Asia Pacific Journal of Applied
Finance, 3 (3), 18-24.
Tampoe, M. &. (2000). Strategic Management, Process, Content and Implementation.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tavitiyaman, P., Zhang, h., & Qu. (2012). The Effect of Competitive Strategies and
Organizational o hotel performance. international Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management , 140-159; vol 24.
72
Thompson, A., Strickland, J., & Gamble, E. (2007). Crafting and Executing Strategy.
London, UK: McGraw-Hill.
Tiwary, D. K. (2011). Security and ethical issues in it:an organization's perspective.
International Journal of Enterprise Computing and Business Systems, 1 (2).
Tootoonchian, G., & Hatahet, A. (2007). Fine grained access control in online social
networks. Technical report.
Turban, T., Bolloju, N., & Liang, T. (2011). Enterprise social networking: opportunities,
adoption and risk mitigation. Journal of Organizational Computing and
Electronic Commerce, 21 (3), 202-220.
Umukoroa, F. G., Kuyeb, O. L., & Sulaimon, A.-H. A. (2009). Matching Strategies to
Situations: Programmed and Adaptive Implementation Approaches. Serbian
Journal of Management, 4 (2), 259 - 272.
Vaast, E., & Kaganer, E. (2013). Social media affordances and governance in the
workplace: an examination of organizational policies. Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication, 9, 78-101.
Vähämäki, J., Schmidt, M., & Molander, J. (2011). Review:Results Based Management in
Development Cooperation. Riksbankens Jubileumsfond.
Van Zyl. (2009). The impact of social networking 2.0 on organizations. The Electronic
Library, 27 (6), 906–918.
Wekesa, J. N. (2013). Socio-Economic Factors Influencing Implemnation of
Humanitarian Assistance in Somalia: A Case of Middle Shebelle Region in
Sourthern Somalia. Masters of Business Administration Thesis, Department of
Business. University of Nairobi . Nairobi.
WFP. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.go.wfp.org
Wilson, J. (2009). Social networking: the business case. Engineering & Technology, 4
(10), 54-56.
Yabs, J. (2007). Strategic Management Practises in Kenya. Nairobi: Leaxal Global Ltd.
Yukl, G., & Mahsud, R. (2010). Why Flexible and Adaptive Learship is Essential.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62 (2), 81–93.
Zaribaf, M., & Hamid, B. (2010). An Effective Factors Pattern Affecting Implementation
of Strategic Plans.
Zaribaf, M., & Hamid, B. (2008). Effective factor patterns affecting implementation of
strategic plans.
73
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Cover Letter
Date: .
Respondent,
Dear Sir/Madam,
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
I am a graduate student at United States International University-Africa pursuing a Master’s
degree in Business Administration. As partial fulfillment of the course, I am conducting a
research on the determinants of strategy implementation. The study uses UNHAS as a case
study.
The results from the study will help UNHAS and related firms in making decisions
regarding strategy implementation. The findings will also act as a source of academic
reference and will be key in offering insights to the government policy makers.
This is an academic research and confidentiality is strictly emphasized, your name will not
appear anywhere in the report. Kindly spare some few minutes to complete the
questionnaire attached.
Thank you in advance,
Yours Faithfully,
Michael Ahamed
TEL: 0736100162
EMAIL: [email protected]
P.O. Box 14634, 00800
NAIROBI
DATE:
74
Appendix B: Questionnaire
The purpose of this questionnaire is to identify the determinants of strategy implementation.
Kindly, respond by either selecting the response among choices given that best represents
your views or by filling the spaces provided.
Part A: General Information
1. Gender
Male Female
2. Management level
Senior Level Middle Level General Staff
3. How long have you worked in this organization?
Less than 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years
7-9 years 10 years and above
4. What is your highest education level?
Secondary Certificate [ ] Diploma level [ ]
Bachelor’s Degree Level [ ] Masters Level [ ]
Doctorate level [ ] Other (specify)………………………
75
Part B: Dependent Variable [Strategy Implementation]
What is your level of agreement to the following statements relating to strategy
implementation in your organization? (5- Strongly agree, 4- Agree, 3-Neutral, 2-Disagree,
1- Strongly Disagree)
1 2 3 4 5
5. In my organization, strategy implementation decision is based
on strategic plans [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
6. In my organization, there are measurable performance
standards for each planned strategy implementation element [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
7. Employees in my organization and other key stakeholders
accept the rationale for strategy change [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
8. There are organized performance standards for monitoring
strategy implementation [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
9. There is no gap between ability to formulate strategy and
sound implementation of strategy [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Part B: Leadership on Strategy Implementation
What is your level of agreement to the following statements relating leadership in your
organization? (5- Strongly agree, 4- Agree, 3-Neutral, 2-Disagree, 1- Strongly Disagree)
1 2 3 4 5
Vision
10. Leaders in my organization have clear picture of the
organization’s future [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
11. Leaders in my organization are optimistic of the
organization’s future [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
12. Top management at my organization are consumed with
making tomorrow a better day [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
13. Leaders in my organization are never satisfied but are always
content with where the organization is [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Motivation
14. Management in my organization are focused in unique
strengths of each employee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
15. Opinion of every employee counts in my organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
76
16. In my organization, clear goals are set for each employee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
17. I feel recognized in this organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Communication
18. Leaders in my organization speak with security and
confidence [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
19. Management team in my organization are brilliant and
informative [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
20. Management takes time to listen to other employees opinions [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
21. Top management are always passionate of the organizations
mission and vision [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Adaptive to Change
22. In my organization, I am encouraged to experiment with new
ideas [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
23. Employees are often deployed from one department to
another [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
24. My leader at work is able to synthesize complex insights and
make high-quality decisions quickly [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
25. My organization has well established customized data
mining, market research, dashboards, and war rooms for
scenario planning
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
77
Part C: Organizational Resources on Strategy Implementation
What is your level of agreement to the following statements relating to availability and
allocation of organizational resources? (5- Strongly agree, 4- Agree, 3-Neutral, 2-Disagree,
1- Strongly Disagree)
1 2 3 4 5
Human Resources
26. We have optimal staffing level in my organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
27. All staff members in my organization are well informed with
the organizations vision and mission [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
28. Staff in my organization have the right knowledge for
strategy implementation [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
29. Employees in my organization have the right skills in
implementing strategic activities [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Financial Resources
30. My organization has set aside enough resources in its budget
for strategy implementation [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
31. Sufficient time is allocated by management for strategy
implementation [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
32. I normally get funding for all activities that I implement [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
33. Finance department releases funds at the right time [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
34. All strategic activities are sufficiently funded at all levels of
the organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Information Systems
35. I can easily access work related information within my
organization whenever I want [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
36. The information system in my organization is simple to use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
37. Information system in my organization is secure [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
38. I normally get accurate information from my organization’s
information system [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Organizational Structure
39. In my organization, there are strict rules on how to carry out
activities [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
78
40. For any change to be made in my organization, there must be
a clear communication from the top management [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
41. Employee specialization has facilitated delegation of duties [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
42. Specialization leads to original thinking and unique solutions
in my organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
43. What other organizational resources affect strategy implementation at your
organization and how?
............................................................................................................................. ...................
................................................................................................................................................
Part D: Culture on Strategy Implementation
What is your level of agreement to the following statements relating to your organizational
culture? (5- Strongly agree, 4- Agree, 3-Neutral, 2-Disagree, 1- Strongly Disagree)
1 2 3 4 5
Team work
44. There is trust among employees at my work place [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
45. Diversity of opinion is respected at my work place [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
46. Staff at my work place support each other to get work done [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
47. There is free and open sharing of ideas and resources at my
work place [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Culture of Stability
48. My organization places high value in rules [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
49. In my organization, several authorizations are required to make
any changes [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
50. Levels of output are consistent in my organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
51. In my organization, activity results can easily be predicted [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Risk taking culture
52. In my organization, employees are encouraged to proactively
seek out opportunities [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
53. My organization encourages staff to take calculated risks in
solving work related problems [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
54. Innovation is highly encouraged in my organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
79
55. In my organization, there is room for making mistakes when
trying new ideas [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
56. Employee ambition is positively encouraged in my
organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Result Oriented
57. Organizational long term goals are very clear [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
58. The long term organizational goals are translated into
functional and individual goals [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
59. There are clear results oriented agreements between staff and
the organization [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
60. There is periodic appraisals on progress [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
61. How else does culture affect strategy implementation in your organization?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………….
Thank You